5 ms·

McCain and Obama Unite on H1B Issue

26 points by bincsearch 18y ago

fallentimes 18y ago
Finally, some fucking compromising/agreeing. If only they could "unite" to cut waste, reduce spending, protect privacy and lower taxes. Baby steps I suppose.
- kirubakaran 18y ago
  Don't expect them to unite on protecting privacy any time soon. They are robbing our privacy "for our own good", remember?
  - markessien 18y ago
    You know, just go look at the info on facebook to see how much the average person cares about privacy.
    - staunch 18y ago
      There's a big difference between voluntarily sharing your personal information and a government taking it. Comparing the two is ridiculous.
      - kirubakaran 18y ago
        Exactly. The fact that I like sex doesn't mean that I wouldn't mind being raped.
        markessien 18y ago
        Touché.
- qqq 18y ago
  Democrats don't want to do half of those things.
  - fallentimes 18y ago
    Based on spending - neither party does/has. Cutting taxes is retarded if you don't cut spending along with it.
  - colinplamondon 18y ago
    Yeah, we want to help lift people out of poverty, improve education, balance the budget, and pay down the national debt- monstrous! Monstrous I tell you!
    - qqq 18y ago
      So, do you want to do more than half the things on the list, or not? Which ones do you want to do?
      - colinplamondon 18y ago
        It's possible to cut waste and still increase funding for infrastructure, early childhood education, and local programs with a track record of success. That's what Obama proposes. We can also cut taxes on the majority of Americans, offsetting that cut by reverting the tax rates on the rich to where they were during Bill Clinton's administration. As for privacy, it sure as hell isn't Democrats that are indefinitely sending people to military prison camps without trial. Or spying on domestic phone calls and intercepting internet traffic for deep packet inspection. It was under Clinton, a Democrat, that we had a balanced budget and fiscal responsibility - when was the last time we had a Republican president where that was true?
        qqq 18y ago
        So you want to raise taxes on some people, and raise spending. You say this is a good idea; maybe it is, maybe it isn't. My statement above, that dems don't want to do half the list, stands. You don't have to be so partisan in response to bland factual statements.
KWD 18y ago
Well here I can say I disagree with both. Let's focus on utilizing our already underemployed tech staff and give companies incentive to retrain and retain our existing 'knowledge' staff. The U.S. has plenty of capable employees without importing more. The only instance I have some agreement with H1Bs is when a foreign student completed a degree from an American university. Otherwise, special processing to import employees for consulting firms, tech companies, etc. should not be allowed at all.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
- markessien 18y ago
  Looking at the issue with an objective eye, don't you think that if one took the very best from other countries that it would improve the overall skill level in your country, instead of taking the mediocre local talent and trying to train them to make them good? The intelligence percentages are roughly the same for all countries (maybe 1% high gifted, 10% quite gifted and so on), so if you took the 1% from other countries, that would give the U.S of A a highly competitive advantage, don't you think?
  - geebee 18y ago
    Yes, I agree. The part where I start to get worried is that 1) the visas tilt heavily toward high tech, and 2) it's indentured. Both could be fixed... Right now, we have a situation where Americans know that if they go into law, they'll be largely protected from competition. This also holds true to a lesser extent for medicine (my uncle, who is a radiologist, told me that licensing is a big factor in keeping the work in the US). So if we expand this program, we should expect less interest among Americans in high tech, and more interest in law. This leads to a positive feedback loop (or negative, if you want to call it that). Fewer Americans -> more need for visas -> further deterrence to Americans -> greater shortage -> more visas... The only real solution would be a global workforce where credentials and licenses are equally available regardless of nationality/border. But obviously, that's not happening. As a result, I'd compromise by supporting a limited number of visas under terms that preserve the mobility of the worker. But a large expansion of the existing program? I think it's a bad idea.
mynameishere 18y ago
This is the main reason Obama needs to win. I'm so fucking sick of anti-American republicans. Can we please allow the democrats to ruin the country? Please?
Dilpil 18y ago
A poll for those who think we need to restrict H1Bs to protect American tech workers: Why? Do you have trouble finding a job despite your degree and qualifications? If so what kind of job? Furthermore, why does being born on US soil give someone exclusive rights to write code on it?
pauljonas 18y ago
A great deal of misunderstanding about H1B and outsourcing... Perhaps I will be down voted for dissenting, but I do write from personal experience. I've seen thousands of jobs outsourced, and contrary to the wisdom expressed on internet forums here and elsewhere, H1B is a prime facilitator of moving work offshore. Entire support/application teams relocated, but supplanted with a liaison team of slightly more experienced non immigrant visa workers brought on shore to work with business units. It's had a direct effect on wages and opportunity, and a big cause of why American students decline to pursue computer science degrees. Sure, there have been winners and survivors, but the average wage / contract rate for a programmer is less than it was 20-30 years ago. Worse, opportunity has been snuffed out — 20 years ago, corporate jobs would go in search in-house looking for anyone who wished to step up and learn the craft, applying their business knowledge. Now, project work is simply delegated to offshore vendors. I have no gripe with bringing in the best and the brightest from abroad. There should be no restrictions in that regard. And for many reading Hacker News, it is all about that. However, the bulk of H1B is allotted to entry level programmers that could have easily been filled by Americans, who could have the choice of a better career path alternative. I know, because I was the guy who had to train those guys who were flown in from India, and I would quickly determine that the extent of their training was reading a manual on the plane ride to the U.S.. No problem, the offshore vendor marketing representative would shrug, we'll send another guy tomorrow. Many posts in defense here of H1B will cite 1s and 2s but corporate outfits use up hundreds (if not 1000s) of such slots. My past experience in Arizona, working for American Express, Honeywell, APS (power company) I can attest to thousands of positions filled by H1B that used to be manned by employees and on-shore contract workers. Most all of those positions are not the "best and the brightest", but imported entry level workers. Then we consider that our reservation systems, utility company billing systems, charge card systems, claims adjudication are staffed predominately by foreigners. In a few years, the Americans who serve as subject matter experts will step aside and the expertise will be entirely with the offshore vendors. Now, I not going to invoke nationalistic appeals, because I do believe it should be a meritocracy, and some of the rhetoric I hear from xenophobic protectionist interests is simply sickening. And yes, I've experienced difficulty in finding work in spite of my degree and qualifications. Or have seen my consulting rate / salary depressed because of H1B. I've retooled and work now for less than a third of what I made in the corporate world, as a web developer for a non-profit now — I've been blessed with a spouse that makes double that as a registered nurse. Soon, due to her having health issues, I may need to seek a better paying gig(s). My inbox does occasionally see a recruiter solicitation, but the rates/salary offered are a joke. Furthermore, the adage that a company cannot find qualified help needs to be qualified with "cannot find help at the pay / rate being offered" — I could go on in this post with detailed occurrences but will cite just one that is emblematic of the issue. A colleague at a past work contract needed to hire a GIS developer and had a candidate in mind. But he could only offer a temporary 3-6 month contract at a rate less than market value. Still, his preferred candidate would have snagged it if there was some guarantee of full time employment at end of the "probationary" period, or an increase in rate or a bonus paid. None of it was to be forthcoming, so it was settled that an H1B candidate got the job.

26 points by bincsearch 18y ago

Finally, some fucking compromising/agreeing. If only they could "unite" to cut waste, reduce spending, protect privacy and lower taxes. Baby steps I suppose.

kirubakaran 18y ago
Don't expect them to unite on protecting privacy any time soon. They are robbing our privacy "for our own good", remember?
- markessien 18y ago
  You know, just go look at the info on facebook to see how much the average person cares about privacy.
  - staunch 18y ago
    There's a big difference between voluntarily sharing your personal information and a government taking it. Comparing the two is ridiculous.
    - kirubakaran 18y ago
      Exactly. The fact that I like sex doesn't mean that I wouldn't mind being raped.
      - markessien 18y ago
        Touché.
qqq 18y ago
Democrats don't want to do half of those things.
- fallentimes 18y ago
  Based on spending - neither party does/has. Cutting taxes is retarded if you don't cut spending along with it.
- colinplamondon 18y ago
  Yeah, we want to help lift people out of poverty, improve education, balance the budget, and pay down the national debt- monstrous! Monstrous I tell you!
  - qqq 18y ago
    So, do you want to do more than half the things on the list, or not? Which ones do you want to do?
    - colinplamondon 18y ago
      It's possible to cut waste and still increase funding for infrastructure, early childhood education, and local programs with a track record of success. That's what Obama proposes. We can also cut taxes on the majority of Americans, offsetting that cut by reverting the tax rates on the rich to where they were during Bill Clinton's administration. As for privacy, it sure as hell isn't Democrats that are indefinitely sending people to military prison camps without trial. Or spying on domestic phone calls and intercepting internet traffic for deep packet inspection. It was under Clinton, a Democrat, that we had a balanced budget and fiscal responsibility - when was the last time we had a Republican president where that was true?
      - qqq 18y ago
        So you want to raise taxes on some people, and raise spending. You say this is a good idea; maybe it is, maybe it isn't. My statement above, that dems don't want to do half the list, stands. You don't have to be so partisan in response to bland factual statements.

KWD 18y ago

Well here I can say I disagree with both. Let's focus on utilizing our already underemployed tech staff and give companies incentive to retrain and retain our existing 'knowledge' staff. The U.S. has plenty of capable employees without importing more. The only instance I have some agreement with H1Bs is when a foreign student completed a degree from an American university. Otherwise, special processing to import employees for consulting firms, tech companies, etc. should not be allowed at all.

deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
markessien 18y ago
Looking at the issue with an objective eye, don't you think that if one took the very best from other countries that it would improve the overall skill level in your country, instead of taking the mediocre local talent and trying to train them to make them good? The intelligence percentages are roughly the same for all countries (maybe 1% high gifted, 10% quite gifted and so on), so if you took the 1% from other countries, that would give the U.S of A a highly competitive advantage, don't you think?
- geebee 18y ago
  Yes, I agree. The part where I start to get worried is that 1) the visas tilt heavily toward high tech, and 2) it's indentured. Both could be fixed... Right now, we have a situation where Americans know that if they go into law, they'll be largely protected from competition. This also holds true to a lesser extent for medicine (my uncle, who is a radiologist, told me that licensing is a big factor in keeping the work in the US). So if we expand this program, we should expect less interest among Americans in high tech, and more interest in law. This leads to a positive feedback loop (or negative, if you want to call it that). Fewer Americans -> more need for visas -> further deterrence to Americans -> greater shortage -> more visas... The only real solution would be a global workforce where credentials and licenses are equally available regardless of nationality/border. But obviously, that's not happening. As a result, I'd compromise by supporting a limited number of visas under terms that preserve the mobility of the worker. But a large expansion of the existing program? I think it's a bad idea.

mynameishere 18y ago

This is the main reason Obama needs to win. I'm so fucking sick of anti-American republicans. Can we please allow the democrats to ruin the country? Please?

Dilpil 18y ago

A poll for those who think we need to restrict H1Bs to protect American tech workers: Why? Do you have trouble finding a job despite your degree and qualifications? If so what kind of job? Furthermore, why does being born on US soil give someone exclusive rights to write code on it?

pauljonas 18y ago

A great deal of misunderstanding about H1B and outsourcing... Perhaps I will be down voted for dissenting, but I do write from personal experience. I've seen thousands of jobs outsourced, and contrary to the wisdom expressed on internet forums here and elsewhere, H1B is a prime facilitator of moving work offshore. Entire support/application teams relocated, but supplanted with a liaison team of slightly more experienced non immigrant visa workers brought on shore to work with business units. It's had a direct effect on wages and opportunity, and a big cause of why American students decline to pursue computer science degrees. Sure, there have been winners and survivors, but the average wage / contract rate for a programmer is less than it was 20-30 years ago. Worse, opportunity has been snuffed out — 20 years ago, corporate jobs would go in search in-house looking for anyone who wished to step up and learn the craft, applying their business knowledge. Now, project work is simply delegated to offshore vendors. I have no gripe with bringing in the best and the brightest from abroad. There should be no restrictions in that regard. And for many reading Hacker News, it is all about that. However, the bulk of H1B is allotted to entry level programmers that could have easily been filled by Americans, who could have the choice of a better career path alternative. I know, because I was the guy who had to train those guys who were flown in from India, and I would quickly determine that the extent of their training was reading a manual on the plane ride to the U.S.. No problem, the offshore vendor marketing representative would shrug, we'll send another guy tomorrow. Many posts in defense here of H1B will cite 1s and 2s but corporate outfits use up hundreds (if not 1000s) of such slots. My past experience in Arizona, working for American Express, Honeywell, APS (power company) I can attest to thousands of positions filled by H1B that used to be manned by employees and on-shore contract workers. Most all of those positions are not the "best and the brightest", but imported entry level workers. Then we consider that our reservation systems, utility company billing systems, charge card systems, claims adjudication are staffed predominately by foreigners. In a few years, the Americans who serve as subject matter experts will step aside and the expertise will be entirely with the offshore vendors. Now, I not going to invoke nationalistic appeals, because I do believe it should be a meritocracy, and some of the rhetoric I hear from xenophobic protectionist interests is simply sickening. And yes, I've experienced difficulty in finding work in spite of my degree and qualifications. Or have seen my consulting rate / salary depressed because of H1B. I've retooled and work now for less than a third of what I made in the corporate world, as a web developer for a non-profit now — I've been blessed with a spouse that makes double that as a registered nurse. Soon, due to her having health issues, I may need to seek a better paying gig(s). My inbox does occasionally see a recruiter solicitation, but the rates/salary offered are a joke. Furthermore, the adage that a company cannot find qualified help needs to be qualified with "cannot find help at the pay / rate being offered" — I could go on in this post with detailed occurrences but will cite just one that is emblematic of the issue. A colleague at a past work contract needed to hire a GIS developer and had a candidate in mind. But he could only offer a temporary 3-6 month contract at a rate less than market value. Still, his preferred candidate would have snagged it if there was some guarantee of full time employment at end of the "probationary" period, or an increase in rate or a bonus paid. None of it was to be forthcoming, so it was settled that an H1B candidate got the job.