5 ms·

It takes around 20+ years to go from H1b to permanent visa/green card. In the meantime your kids born in US have grown up, graduated, you have a house and every

It takes around 20+ years to go from H1b to permanent visa/green card. In the meantime your kids born in US have grown up, graduated, you have a house and everything could be yanked at the border when you are travelling. Meanwhile vast majority of them pay into taxes and social security and leave the US and never see a dime of that money. Immigrants are the easiest group to exploit by everyone because they have no voice and are vilified by vast majority of the people include the so called intellectuals in here.

newyankee 2y ago
Yup, left US after years of working and doubt will ever see social security for self.
- next_xibalba 2y ago
  I’m sure this is no consolation, but as a born-and-raised citizen who has paid into social security for 15 years now, I have serious doubts about seeing a positive return on those taxes myself.
  - lern_too_spel 2y ago
    That's not how social security works. You're not supposed to get a positive return. You directly pay a basic income to retired people (minus administration costs). When you retire, workers pay a basic income to you.
    - dataflow 2y ago
      I'm pretty sure they understand how social security works. You missed the point they were making.
      - lern_too_spel 2y ago
        Asking for a positive return on social security is like asking for a positive return on welfare. The positive return comes from not having so many homeless old people all over the country. It's not a personal investment vehicle.
        FredPret 2y ago
        It could be that OP expects Social Security to be kaput by the time he gets to be old. Looking at the population graph, that’s a valid concern. There’s a ton of boomers and a ton of millenials, but very few babies to pay for our retirement. (This phenomenon could invalidate even individual stock investment retirement plans as well. We need a future generation of workers, investors, entrepreneurs, consumers).
        dataflow 2y ago
        > This phenomenon could invalidate even individual stock investment retirement plans as well. It has always baffled me how nobody ever takes this into account for investments.
    - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
      The issue is that, for me and anyone else who reaches retirement age after 2034, only about 80% of that basic income will be available. For reasons I'm not super clear on, this idea tends to get coded as a conspiracy theory in many circles, despite being uncontroversially true and widely reported on.
      - lern_too_spel 2y ago
        That's a perennial Boogeyman. Policymakers have a wide array of tweaks they could make (from adjusting the cap to adjusting retirement age) at any time that could push that out by another century. https://www.epi.org/blog/a-record-share-of-earnings-was-not-subject-to-social-security-taxes-in-2021-inequalitys-undermining-of-social-security-has-accelerated/ https://www.epi.org/blog/a-record-share-of-earnings-was-not-...
    - bombcar 2y ago
      This is how it works, but it is not how it was sold (and all the "work tracking" confuses people as to what it is doing).
  - radicality 2y ago
    Social security also kinda feels like a Ponzi scheme. Use current ‘investors’ money to pay for retired people.
    - lesuorac 2y ago
      If you were paying retired people with investors money then why does SSA have a giant surplus of nearly 3 trillion [1]? The surplus is because of all the people that have payed into the program and haven't retired yet ... [1]: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - commandlinefan 2y ago
      If only they just used the current 'investors' money to pay the retirees. They actually use the social security taxes to pay for "whatever" and hope they can come up with the rest when they need it.
  - ganeshkrishnan 2y ago
    >I’m sure this is no consolation, but as a born-and-raised citizen who has paid into social security for 15 years now, I have serious doubts about seeing a positive return on those taxes myself. Look at the bright side though: You get a chance to get conscripted for a war against Iran/Russia/China and also get to blow up windowless mudhouses in the desert to protect democracy and freedom back in the states.
geodel 2y ago
So these highly skilled and smart immigrants coming on H1 to US without ever understanding what they are getting into? They should absolutely be shunning this unfair system and helping India become vishwaguru of software.
- School-Cotton 2y ago
  The byzantine US immigration system absolutely is an impediment to people coming and staying here, and in my (admittedly anecdotal) estimation is a major competitive disadvantage, and a big part of the reason the UK, EU, Canada and China are making progress towards becoming tech hubs.
  - geodel 2y ago
    Well everyone is making progress. Relevant point is how far they have come and how long they've taken.
    - aylmao 2y ago
      Those particular cases have benefited by the shortcomings of the USA actually. I know some big tech companies send workers who weren't able to secure US immigration specifically to offices in Canada, the UK or the EU. For example Meta and Google [1][2]. One can expect the company then grows an interest in developing full engineering teams in these sites. One can also expect some people might simply decide to not come back to the USA. With the general rise of China's tech scene, recently there's been a trend by which the USA doesn't retain Chinese international students and they instead opt to return home. One has to imagine the very, very long immigration process they have to go to has to do with this [4]. [1]: https://www.teamblind.com/post/Does-Meta-relocate-you-to-Canada-when-H1b-is-up-W7VRk0as https://www.teamblind.com/post/Does-Meta-relocate-you-to-Can... [2]: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-difficult-to-relocate-from-the-Google-London-office-to-Mountain-View-after-a-year-of-work-time-needed-to-acquire-L-1-visa https://www.quora.com/Is-it-difficult-to-relocate-from-the-G... [3]: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-08-29/The-return-wave-Why-80-of-China-s-top-graduates-are-returning-home-1wsRciUg7ok/p.html https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-08-29/The-return-wave-Why-80... [4]: https://www.statista.com/chart/16528/long-wait-times-for-green-cards/ https://www.statista.com/chart/16528/long-wait-times-for-gre...
BeetleB 2y ago
> It takes around 20+ years to go from H1b to permanent visa/green card. Primarily only for Indians. For almost everyone else, it's much quicker. Most people I know get it in 2-3 years. Many in under 2 years. (And yes, it's frankly immoral that they have a separate queue for Indians). So don't get rid of H1B. Make it one queue.
thatfrenchguy 2y ago
20 years only if you're born in India married to someone born in India. Not great either way though, but it's really affecting the Indian community because of their particular norms.
- toast0 2y ago
  If your spouse is a US citizen or permanent resident on their own, great. But if you're on H1-B and your spouse is on H-4, I don't think their country of birth makes a difference? If you're both on H1-B, then sure, having a different country of birth can help.
  - lanakei 2y ago
    It does make a difference. When filing for adjustment of status, you can request USCIS to consider both you and your spouse as chargable to your spouse's country of birth, and therefore be placed in a more favourable GC queue. This is called cross-chargeability [1]. Because of this, the "100-year green card queue" problem only really applies for a couple who are both born in India/China, with kids who are not born in the US. If even one child was born in the US, they would be able to sponsor both parents for an immediate green card when they turn 21 years old. In the meantime, the H1-B beneficiary can extend their visa indefinitely and port their approved I-140 whenever they switch jobs, with a 6-month grace period. The spouse also has full working rights. 21 years is a long time, but while working, both parents will accumulate social security credits and will be eligible to recieve benefits upon retirement (if they've secured a green card by then). [1] https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-a-chapter-6 https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-a-chapter-...
rbanffy 2y ago
> your kids born in US have grown up And now even their citizenship is threatened.
- ImJamal 2y ago
  If they were born here then they are citizens and nobody is advocating stripping them of citizenship.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    Not if the next president gets away with it: https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2024-12-16/trump-said-he-would-revoke-birthright-citizenship-it-hasnt-worked-in-the-past https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2024-12-16/trump-said... It's unlikely he'll succeed, and he walked back on many campaign promises.
    - ImJamal 2y ago
      You are confusing what he is calling for. He is not advocating for people who are already citizens to lose their citizenship. He is saying, going forward, people who are born here will not automatically be given citizenship.

newyankee 2y ago

Yup, left US after years of working and doubt will ever see social security for self.

next_xibalba 2y ago
I’m sure this is no consolation, but as a born-and-raised citizen who has paid into social security for 15 years now, I have serious doubts about seeing a positive return on those taxes myself.
- lern_too_spel 2y ago
  That's not how social security works. You're not supposed to get a positive return. You directly pay a basic income to retired people (minus administration costs). When you retire, workers pay a basic income to you.
  - dataflow 2y ago
    I'm pretty sure they understand how social security works. You missed the point they were making.
    - lern_too_spel 2y ago
      Asking for a positive return on social security is like asking for a positive return on welfare. The positive return comes from not having so many homeless old people all over the country. It's not a personal investment vehicle.
      - FredPret 2y ago
        It could be that OP expects Social Security to be kaput by the time he gets to be old. Looking at the population graph, that’s a valid concern. There’s a ton of boomers and a ton of millenials, but very few babies to pay for our retirement. (This phenomenon could invalidate even individual stock investment retirement plans as well. We need a future generation of workers, investors, entrepreneurs, consumers).
        dataflow 2y ago
        > This phenomenon could invalidate even individual stock investment retirement plans as well. It has always baffled me how nobody ever takes this into account for investments.
  - SpicyLemonZest 2y ago
    The issue is that, for me and anyone else who reaches retirement age after 2034, only about 80% of that basic income will be available. For reasons I'm not super clear on, this idea tends to get coded as a conspiracy theory in many circles, despite being uncontroversially true and widely reported on.
    - lern_too_spel 2y ago
      That's a perennial Boogeyman. Policymakers have a wide array of tweaks they could make (from adjusting the cap to adjusting retirement age) at any time that could push that out by another century. https://www.epi.org/blog/a-record-share-of-earnings-was-not-subject-to-social-security-taxes-in-2021-inequalitys-undermining-of-social-security-has-accelerated/ https://www.epi.org/blog/a-record-share-of-earnings-was-not-...
  - bombcar 2y ago
    This is how it works, but it is not how it was sold (and all the "work tracking" confuses people as to what it is doing).
- radicality 2y ago
  Social security also kinda feels like a Ponzi scheme. Use current ‘investors’ money to pay for retired people.
  - lesuorac 2y ago
    If you were paying retired people with investors money then why does SSA have a giant surplus of nearly 3 trillion [1]? The surplus is because of all the people that have payed into the program and haven't retired yet ... [1]: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/assets.html
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - commandlinefan 2y ago
    If only they just used the current 'investors' money to pay the retirees. They actually use the social security taxes to pay for "whatever" and hope they can come up with the rest when they need it.
- ganeshkrishnan 2y ago
  >I’m sure this is no consolation, but as a born-and-raised citizen who has paid into social security for 15 years now, I have serious doubts about seeing a positive return on those taxes myself. Look at the bright side though: You get a chance to get conscripted for a war against Iran/Russia/China and also get to blow up windowless mudhouses in the desert to protect democracy and freedom back in the states.

geodel 2y ago

So these highly skilled and smart immigrants coming on H1 to US without ever understanding what they are getting into? They should absolutely be shunning this unfair system and helping India become vishwaguru of software.

School-Cotton 2y ago
The byzantine US immigration system absolutely is an impediment to people coming and staying here, and in my (admittedly anecdotal) estimation is a major competitive disadvantage, and a big part of the reason the UK, EU, Canada and China are making progress towards becoming tech hubs.
- geodel 2y ago
  Well everyone is making progress. Relevant point is how far they have come and how long they've taken.
  - aylmao 2y ago
    Those particular cases have benefited by the shortcomings of the USA actually. I know some big tech companies send workers who weren't able to secure US immigration specifically to offices in Canada, the UK or the EU. For example Meta and Google [1][2]. One can expect the company then grows an interest in developing full engineering teams in these sites. One can also expect some people might simply decide to not come back to the USA. With the general rise of China's tech scene, recently there's been a trend by which the USA doesn't retain Chinese international students and they instead opt to return home. One has to imagine the very, very long immigration process they have to go to has to do with this [4]. [1]: https://www.teamblind.com/post/Does-Meta-relocate-you-to-Canada-when-H1b-is-up-W7VRk0as https://www.teamblind.com/post/Does-Meta-relocate-you-to-Can... [2]: https://www.quora.com/Is-it-difficult-to-relocate-from-the-Google-London-office-to-Mountain-View-after-a-year-of-work-time-needed-to-acquire-L-1-visa https://www.quora.com/Is-it-difficult-to-relocate-from-the-G... [3]: https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-08-29/The-return-wave-Why-80-of-China-s-top-graduates-are-returning-home-1wsRciUg7ok/p.html https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-08-29/The-return-wave-Why-80... [4]: https://www.statista.com/chart/16528/long-wait-times-for-green-cards/ https://www.statista.com/chart/16528/long-wait-times-for-gre...

BeetleB 2y ago

> It takes around 20+ years to go from H1b to permanent visa/green card. Primarily only for Indians. For almost everyone else, it's much quicker. Most people I know get it in 2-3 years. Many in under 2 years. (And yes, it's frankly immoral that they have a separate queue for Indians). So don't get rid of H1B. Make it one queue.

thatfrenchguy 2y ago

20 years only if you're born in India married to someone born in India. Not great either way though, but it's really affecting the Indian community because of their particular norms.

toast0 2y ago
If your spouse is a US citizen or permanent resident on their own, great. But if you're on H1-B and your spouse is on H-4, I don't think their country of birth makes a difference? If you're both on H1-B, then sure, having a different country of birth can help.
- lanakei 2y ago
  It does make a difference. When filing for adjustment of status, you can request USCIS to consider both you and your spouse as chargable to your spouse's country of birth, and therefore be placed in a more favourable GC queue. This is called cross-chargeability [1]. Because of this, the "100-year green card queue" problem only really applies for a couple who are both born in India/China, with kids who are not born in the US. If even one child was born in the US, they would be able to sponsor both parents for an immediate green card when they turn 21 years old. In the meantime, the H1-B beneficiary can extend their visa indefinitely and port their approved I-140 whenever they switch jobs, with a 6-month grace period. The spouse also has full working rights. 21 years is a long time, but while working, both parents will accumulate social security credits and will be eligible to recieve benefits upon retirement (if they've secured a green card by then). [1] https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-a-chapter-6 https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-7-part-a-chapter-...

rbanffy 2y ago

> your kids born in US have grown up And now even their citizenship is threatened.

ImJamal 2y ago
If they were born here then they are citizens and nobody is advocating stripping them of citizenship.
- rbanffy 2y ago
  Not if the next president gets away with it: https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2024-12-16/trump-said-he-would-revoke-birthright-citizenship-it-hasnt-worked-in-the-past https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2024-12-16/trump-said... It's unlikely he'll succeed, and he walked back on many campaign promises.
  - ImJamal 2y ago
    You are confusing what he is calling for. He is not advocating for people who are already citizens to lose their citizenship. He is saying, going forward, people who are born here will not automatically be given citizenship.