4 ms·

H1B visas are a lottery with <30% chance of getting picked up. Employment-based immigration to the US is a long process (1.5-2 yrs), on top of only 15% green ca

H1B visas are a lottery with <30% chance of getting picked up. Employment-based immigration to the US is a long process (1.5-2 yrs), on top of only 15% green cards being allocated to it, not to mention all the rate throttling quotas. USCIS is primarily paper run and super backlogged so those already here are also stuck in paperwork and in many cases end up losing work auth because they are so slow. Many don't realize how bad its gotten lately on the immigration front. Last year, USCIS wasted 160K green cards, this year they are on track to waste 200K green cards, simply because they are too slow to process paperwork. Companies are probably tired of all this uncertainty and legal overhead so they now offer relocation to their offices outside US if you have visa problems and to have easier access to talent. Remote work has accelerated this since teams are now learning to be geographically distributed. Companies are now finding it easier to just let their top talent work from their home country, pay them way more than local rates (helps retention) and setup payroll than deal with US visas and immigration. It's only a few years ordeal to get a green card if you're not Indian, otherwise it's a multi-decade wait. So many are starting to take the offer and move out once they've earned a decent amount.

tablespoon 4y ago
Also, if you (as an employer) don't bother with the US immigration system, you don't have to pay US-competitive salaries as that system requires. Sure, FAANG companies may be too rich to care, but they're also probably a small fraction of US tech employment.
usrn 4y ago
What's the difference between outsourcing and immigration? It's still taking jobs away from the native population.
- vsskanth 4y ago
  Its a very common misconception that immigration takes away jobs from the native population. Also known as "Lump of Labor Fallacy".
  - usrn 4y ago
    Then why not outsource?
- causi 4y ago
  Because the money still goes into the American economy. They buy food, housing, insurance, consumer goods, services. Immigrants are a huge financial boon because we get an adult that Americans didn't have to pay for. Prenatal care, delivery, food, childhood education, all of that gets paid for by somebody else and then we get the product of their expenditure for free. That's like every single immigrant donating one or two hundred thousand dollars to the nation as a whole the moment they cross the border. Then as an added bonus they have children here, and help shore up declining birthrates.
  - usrn 4y ago
    We don't want them buying housing, we have a housing shortage.
    - vsskanth 4y ago
      "They" are not the cause of the shortage. You will have a housing shortage even without "Them" because of zoning issues and housing supply shortage.
      - polski-g 4y ago
        It's both
    - causi 4y ago
      More people wanting a product is a short-term price driver. If the price stays exorbitant over years and decades that is a supply-side problem that will not be fixed by slightly reducing the number of consumers.
    - rchaud 4y ago
      Who should buy the housing stock then? Investment funds that will convert the homes to long-term Airbnbs?
- sfink 4y ago
  Kind of like the difference between renting and buying. Financially, money paid to immigrants stays in the economy of the country they've immigrated to. (Minus money sent back to family in their country of origin, but that will necessarily be much less than 100%.) Socially, immigrants become part of the community & society. Given that they tend to be skilled, motivated, and adaptable (they need to communicate with multiple cultures, for one!), this tends to be a good deal for the receiving country. It's like trade, it always seems to end up enriching trading partners as compared to those that refuse to trade at all. And like trade, it requires some degree of control and regulation to not impoverish portions of the population while enriching others—both trade and immigration can be gamed. Nothing's going to have a positive impact on everyone across the board, but it's not like what people seem to be fearing when they focus only on the direct job impact on the so-called "native" population.

tablespoon 4y ago

Also, if you (as an employer) don't bother with the US immigration system, you don't have to pay US-competitive salaries as that system requires. Sure, FAANG companies may be too rich to care, but they're also probably a small fraction of US tech employment.

usrn 4y ago

What's the difference between outsourcing and immigration? It's still taking jobs away from the native population.

vsskanth 4y ago
Its a very common misconception that immigration takes away jobs from the native population. Also known as "Lump of Labor Fallacy".
- usrn 4y ago
  Then why not outsource?
causi 4y ago
Because the money still goes into the American economy. They buy food, housing, insurance, consumer goods, services. Immigrants are a huge financial boon because we get an adult that Americans didn't have to pay for. Prenatal care, delivery, food, childhood education, all of that gets paid for by somebody else and then we get the product of their expenditure for free. That's like every single immigrant donating one or two hundred thousand dollars to the nation as a whole the moment they cross the border. Then as an added bonus they have children here, and help shore up declining birthrates.
- usrn 4y ago
  We don't want them buying housing, we have a housing shortage.
  - vsskanth 4y ago
    "They" are not the cause of the shortage. You will have a housing shortage even without "Them" because of zoning issues and housing supply shortage.
    - polski-g 4y ago
      It's both
  - causi 4y ago
    More people wanting a product is a short-term price driver. If the price stays exorbitant over years and decades that is a supply-side problem that will not be fixed by slightly reducing the number of consumers.
  - rchaud 4y ago
    Who should buy the housing stock then? Investment funds that will convert the homes to long-term Airbnbs?
sfink 4y ago
Kind of like the difference between renting and buying. Financially, money paid to immigrants stays in the economy of the country they've immigrated to. (Minus money sent back to family in their country of origin, but that will necessarily be much less than 100%.) Socially, immigrants become part of the community & society. Given that they tend to be skilled, motivated, and adaptable (they need to communicate with multiple cultures, for one!), this tends to be a good deal for the receiving country. It's like trade, it always seems to end up enriching trading partners as compared to those that refuse to trade at all. And like trade, it requires some degree of control and regulation to not impoverish portions of the population while enriching others—both trade and immigration can be gamed. Nothing's going to have a positive impact on everyone across the board, but it's not like what people seem to be fearing when they focus only on the direct job impact on the so-called "native" population.