2 ms·

Why do you reject working people then? Then the visa requirement should be something like “if you find a job you’re welcome to stay”.

• true_religion 3y ago
  Because the citizens of the nation don’t want to be undercut by foreigners in the job market. Outside of supply constraints, there’s nothing stopping everything from being a minimum wage job.
  • mrtksn 3y ago
    A few comments up I wrote why this way of thinking is wrong. Artificial limit of worker supply isn’t doing anything good for the society. FIY, the same argument was made against women’s employment. More people working doesn’t reduce prosperity.
    • slaymaker1907 3y ago
      It does seemingly benefit workers in the US. I know people who had a huge salary increase, working for the same company, by moving ~150mi from Vancouver to Seattle solely for moving.
    • dudul 3y ago
      And yet, before women entered the workforce it was possible to sustain a middle class household on one salary. Now it requires 2. Capitalism always finds a way.
• jcranmer 3y ago
  What happens if the employer fires them 5 seconds into their first day of employment? Or the employer decides to offer the employee, say, 5 hours of work a year? You need some sort of program to verify that the job exists and is "real" in some fashion--this paperwork is the work visa. Don't get me wrong: the US visa polices are a shambolic mess that is counterproductive to its own aims. I'd very much prefer a system that's a lot closer to "employer can sponsor anyone to come into the country if they need to hire from other countries." But what's preventing that isn't the existence of work visas; it's the unwillingness of politicians to advocate for such an immigration system (for which the primary reason I'd suspect boils down to some variant of racism--they feel immigration should be extremely difficult for various undesirable groups).