5 ms·

> This is really bad. Families are going to get told to leave. I’m surprised that there is no discussion on this thread about the impact to people who haven’t d

> This is really bad. Families are going to get told to leave. I’m surprised that there is no discussion on this thread about the impact to people who haven’t done anything wrong. It's not a moral issue (except for the big H-1B mills that are gaming the system.) But nothing has changed: these are not an offer of citizenship. They are temporary work visas with no guarantees: an opportunity to do temporary specialty work in the U.S. If someone were to bring their family, they have done so with the explicit knowledge that the situation could change at any time.

hoka-one-one 6y ago
The decision would be ok in most other countries, where the land is some ethnic group's birthright. America, however, is unique in that it's everyone's birthright. The only reason most educated people don't support totally open borders is because there's so much poverty outside the US, but H-1B holders are not poor.
- chmod600 6y ago
  On what basis are you deciding what someone's (or some group's) birthrights are?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - dougmwne 6y ago
    I think they may have been referring to varying citizenship laws across the world. The USA has citizenship by soil and blood, meaning that the country belongs to the people born here and the children of it's citizens. (Let's set aside naturalization for a moment, as that is not a birthright.) Some other countries have citizenship by blood only, so in a sense, those countries belong to their ethnic groups, wherever they may be. So in essence, the USA is more inclusive in bestowing the birthright of citizenship, which befits a nation of immigrants. I support the free movement of people, but also the sovereignty of individual nations to decide who that country belongs to. For a strange example, the UK belongs to the queen, but she's nice enough to let her subjects have the use of it. And back to naturalization, these H1b changes highlight why naturalization is important and should be achievable for anywho who ties their life to the USA. Citizenship confers privleges and protections and asking people to make life altering investments into a country without offering citizenship in return is exploitative and immoral.
- dudul 6y ago
  Boe is America everyones birthright more than Chile or australia?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
nrmitchi 6y ago
> these are not an offer of citizenship No one said that it was, but there is a difference between submitting for an extension X months ago and fully expecting to get it, and then the rules changing out from under you and being told "No. I understand you've been here for 10 years, but pack up all your shit and leave". 5 years ago it was technically "and leave tonight" (which I'm sure you understand is unreasonable). Luckily now there is at least a 60 day grace period to look for something else, but still. You are being rather unsympathetic to people who find themselves in this situation.
- someguydave 6y ago
  They should change visas to be auctioned off, so people who wish to stay can do so.
- dudul 6y ago
  I dont think an H1B holder can stay for 10 years, unless the rule changed since I had one, but 10ish years ago it was 6 years max.
  - nrmitchi 6y ago
    AFAIK if you are a valid green card application with a valid priority date you are allowed to. Considering the backlog for green cards if you're from india/china, there are _tons_ of people in this situation.
    - dudul 6y ago
      Good point, but then would you lose your status even if your h1b ended? Wouldn't the pending GC petition be enough to keep you in status? It happened to me, I lost my h1b a few weeks after filling for my GC and I had no problem staying in the country. It was a GC via marriage though, rules ma be different for employer sponsored GCs
      - nrmitchi 6y ago
        I believe it is enough, as long as you have received an I-140, but I'm not sure. This is something that should be answered by an immigration attorney. Edited to correct the form number
tshaddox 6y ago
I don't think you can dismiss the moral issue. The fact that there may technically be no "guarantee" does not mean that people ought to be treated unreasonably. The fact that some people may not care about the effects American policies have on people who are not American is not the same thing as it not being a moral issue.
lxe 6y ago
People oh H1B are either very friendly to constant moves or are banking on a path to citizenship through it. The latter category is the vast majority, let's be honest here.
- outworlder 6y ago
  > People oh H1B are either very friendly to constant moves or are banking on a path to citizenship through it BY DESIGN, as H1Bs (as well as L1s and a couple others) are dual intent
b0sk 6y ago
It's the rules!
Florin_Andrei 6y ago
> If someone were to bring their family, they have done so with the explicit knowledge that the situation could change at any time. I don't disagree - and I'm a US citizen, who previously was a greencard holder, who previously came here via the H1B process. But look at it this way: the whole greencard approval process sometimes takes years, or even over a decade. When people spend 10 years in some place, the perspective changes a bit. It does become a complicated issue, with moral overtones too. Make the goddamn greencard approval (or rejection) faster. If processing the papers took a few months, instead of years, after which you got your yea or nay decision, then the whole issue would be much simpler - and, indeed, as you say it would not be a moral issue at all. But think of someone who spent here 10 years, brought their spouse here, had a couple kids (that clock doesn't stop ticking just because you're waiting for a rubber stamp to hit the paper), the kids go to school, and from a cultural perspective the kids are American - and then they are all told to get the hell out of here. That's terrible. Speed up that stupid process. Then sure, tweak the rules any way you see fit.
seventhtiger 6y ago
How many years do you think is the limit to being temporary and still being honest? If they were giving 50 year H1B visa that are not guaranteed to be renewed, would you still say that it is the visa holder's fault for bringing their family? If not for 50 years, then when should we start blaming them? How many years is a reasonable amount to put someone at fault for putting down roots?
omegote 6y ago
Damn, your lack of tact is seriously depressing.

hoka-one-one 6y ago

The decision would be ok in most other countries, where the land is some ethnic group's birthright. America, however, is unique in that it's everyone's birthright. The only reason most educated people don't support totally open borders is because there's so much poverty outside the US, but H-1B holders are not poor.

chmod600 6y ago
On what basis are you deciding what someone's (or some group's) birthrights are?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dougmwne 6y ago
  I think they may have been referring to varying citizenship laws across the world. The USA has citizenship by soil and blood, meaning that the country belongs to the people born here and the children of it's citizens. (Let's set aside naturalization for a moment, as that is not a birthright.) Some other countries have citizenship by blood only, so in a sense, those countries belong to their ethnic groups, wherever they may be. So in essence, the USA is more inclusive in bestowing the birthright of citizenship, which befits a nation of immigrants. I support the free movement of people, but also the sovereignty of individual nations to decide who that country belongs to. For a strange example, the UK belongs to the queen, but she's nice enough to let her subjects have the use of it. And back to naturalization, these H1b changes highlight why naturalization is important and should be achievable for anywho who ties their life to the USA. Citizenship confers privleges and protections and asking people to make life altering investments into a country without offering citizenship in return is exploitative and immoral.
dudul 6y ago
Boe is America everyones birthright more than Chile or australia?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

nrmitchi 6y ago

> these are not an offer of citizenship No one said that it was, but there is a difference between submitting for an extension X months ago and fully expecting to get it, and then the rules changing out from under you and being told "No. I understand you've been here for 10 years, but pack up all your shit and leave". 5 years ago it was technically "and leave tonight" (which I'm sure you understand is unreasonable). Luckily now there is at least a 60 day grace period to look for something else, but still. You are being rather unsympathetic to people who find themselves in this situation.

someguydave 6y ago
They should change visas to be auctioned off, so people who wish to stay can do so.
dudul 6y ago
I dont think an H1B holder can stay for 10 years, unless the rule changed since I had one, but 10ish years ago it was 6 years max.
- nrmitchi 6y ago
  AFAIK if you are a valid green card application with a valid priority date you are allowed to. Considering the backlog for green cards if you're from india/china, there are _tons_ of people in this situation.
  - dudul 6y ago
    Good point, but then would you lose your status even if your h1b ended? Wouldn't the pending GC petition be enough to keep you in status? It happened to me, I lost my h1b a few weeks after filling for my GC and I had no problem staying in the country. It was a GC via marriage though, rules ma be different for employer sponsored GCs
    - nrmitchi 6y ago
      I believe it is enough, as long as you have received an I-140, but I'm not sure. This is something that should be answered by an immigration attorney. Edited to correct the form number

tshaddox 6y ago

I don't think you can dismiss the moral issue. The fact that there may technically be no "guarantee" does not mean that people ought to be treated unreasonably. The fact that some people may not care about the effects American policies have on people who are not American is not the same thing as it not being a moral issue.

lxe 6y ago

People oh H1B are either very friendly to constant moves or are banking on a path to citizenship through it. The latter category is the vast majority, let's be honest here.

outworlder 6y ago
> People oh H1B are either very friendly to constant moves or are banking on a path to citizenship through it BY DESIGN, as H1Bs (as well as L1s and a couple others) are dual intent

b0sk 6y ago

It's the rules!

Florin_Andrei 6y ago

> If someone were to bring their family, they have done so with the explicit knowledge that the situation could change at any time. I don't disagree - and I'm a US citizen, who previously was a greencard holder, who previously came here via the H1B process. But look at it this way: the whole greencard approval process sometimes takes years, or even over a decade. When people spend 10 years in some place, the perspective changes a bit. It does become a complicated issue, with moral overtones too. Make the goddamn greencard approval (or rejection) faster. If processing the papers took a few months, instead of years, after which you got your yea or nay decision, then the whole issue would be much simpler - and, indeed, as you say it would not be a moral issue at all. But think of someone who spent here 10 years, brought their spouse here, had a couple kids (that clock doesn't stop ticking just because you're waiting for a rubber stamp to hit the paper), the kids go to school, and from a cultural perspective the kids are American - and then they are all told to get the hell out of here. That's terrible. Speed up that stupid process. Then sure, tweak the rules any way you see fit.

seventhtiger 6y ago

How many years do you think is the limit to being temporary and still being honest? If they were giving 50 year H1B visa that are not guaranteed to be renewed, would you still say that it is the visa holder's fault for bringing their family? If not for 50 years, then when should we start blaming them? How many years is a reasonable amount to put someone at fault for putting down roots?

omegote 6y ago

Damn, your lack of tact is seriously depressing.