8 ms·

Great! I had so many colleagues in this situation - invariably it made starting a family more attractive as one spouse was basically stay-at-home anyway. I und

by gdilla 13y ago

Great! I had so many colleagues in this situation - invariably it made starting a family more attractive as one spouse was basically stay-at-home anyway. I understand that Americans want jobs for Americans, but bringing in immigrants and letting them work means you get taxpayers whose education was subsidized by a foreign government. They basically are net contributors to the economy upon their first paycheck. The higher skilled they are, the more dramatic this effect. It seems like a huge net win to the US economy. I'm sure there's a good counterargument to this, but I'm biased being an immigrant myself.

akgerber 13y ago
As an American citizen, at least half of my employers have had at least one immigrant founder— immigration seems like a big contributor to the US' excellence in high tech. But H-1B visas aren't great for me, since they give so much more leverage to the employer and not the employee— just giving green cards or work visas to skilled immigrants would be much better.
- sigkill 13y ago
  Aren't H1B work visa? But I think your idea of the green card is pretty good to return the balance of employer/employee leverage. I wonder what abuses that might have though.
  - eshvk 13y ago
    I think what the parent implies by "work visa" is a visa that is not tied to the employer. The H1B as it stands now is just a proxy for indentured labor.
    - goshx 13y ago
      right, that requirement to be tied to the employer is also what prevents the H1B to run its own company (although H1B can start a business, (s)he is not allowed to run it.)
    - kosievdmerwe 13y ago
      > indentured labour. Could you explain, I'm not sure how this is the case?
      - eshvk 13y ago
        Sure. The way the H1B works is that it is tied to your employer. The employer knows this. You know it. This creates leverage on the part of the employer. How? Two ways: One, you get fired, you are out of status immediately, you have to leave the country ASAP or find a job immediately. So, you make sure you don't get fired. Two, an H1B employee is supposed to be paid the prevailing job market rate. For CA, San Francisco County, the max is around 100K. It is a pretty sum. BUT. It is also less than market rate as of six months ago (when I was job hunting). Now, most big companies don't need to exploit you. But a wily manager can easily fuck with you with enough awareness of the issue. Personally, I have noticed this phenomenon at smaller companies where a H1B candidate is potentially more attractive. I got a green card very recently, however, I am obviously not an American and am relatively young enough that I can be suspected of not having a Green Card. I have had a few situations where hiring managers were rather disappointed that I didn't need their help to acquire an H1B or for them to file for my green card.
- kosievdmerwe 13y ago
  How does an H-1B give leverage to the employer? You can change jobs, you just have to get your new employer to notify the state that they are now your employer.
avar 13y ago
The Netherlands even gives you a tax discount for 10 years if you're a highly skilled migrant, the criteria for being able to apply for it basically comes down to "is this person likely to need welfare? No? They get lower taxes then": http://www.expatica.com/nl/finance_business/tax/The-Dutch-30-percent-ruling_explained_11398.html http://www.expatica.com/nl/finance_business/tax/The-Dutch-30... It makes sense for states to enact programs like these for the reasons you pointed out. If you can get skilled migrants you get net contributors from day one.
- judk 13y ago
  It seems counterproductive to the point of welfare to have the people who need welfare pay for it. It isn't an insurance policy.
  - avar 13y ago
    No that's not what this policy does. For the sake of argument (and simplicity) let's say that schooling and other childhood / early adult expenses for the average citizen cost the state $100,000, and let's say that in return the state is likely to gain $200,000 in tax money back from citizens over their lifetime once they become productive members of society. It's pretty obvious that if you give adult immigrants who can immediately become contributing members of the economy a 1/3 tax discount that the state loses nothing, and only stands to gain from the deal, since they never had to pay those $100,000 to send them to school as children, that cost was offloaded to some other nation-state. The tax contribution of those immigrants to social programs like welfare is also going to be just the same as the contributions of native citizens, despite the lower tax rate, because the state isn't also using that tax money to pay for those $100,000 it never spent. If anything the flaw in the Dutch policy is that the tax discount isn't large enough, should last for more than 10 years (i.e. indefinitely, and should be larger if you promise to get out of the country before retirement), and that they should offer it to more immigrants, not just the highly skilled.
  - fennecfoxen 13y ago
    The welfare state has a limitation: it needs to be paid for. It also has a consequence: people who seek welfare may attempt to move to the welfare state in order to obtain it. This may imperil the ability of the state to pay for the welfare - or, at least, the willingness of the taxpayers to fund that welfare. So this impacts immigration policy. Insofar as the welfare state IS like an insurance policy, this is like the health insurance company denying coverage for a pre-existing condition.
djb_hackernews 13y ago
I'll provide a counter argument. The foreign workers aren't actually that high skilled and their education is questionable. So upon their first paycheck they are displacing local workers who could also do the job, putting extra pressure on local economies that they didn't "pay into", and giving more power to employers based on the restrictive nature of these foreign worker visas.
- ulfw 13y ago
  Yea. Because all locals are so highly educated. Have you seen CS departments at major school in the US? Look at the demographics and then think again.
  - djb_hackernews 13y ago
    I'm honestly not sure what point you are trying to make. That US CS programs aren't as rigorous as foreign programs? That US CS programs aren't also filled with foreign students, further displacing and out pricing citizens? My point is, we have 1.7 Million college educated grads currently unemployed[0]. We have an estimated 650,000 H1B workers[1]. I'd say we have plenty of educated, hard working, and able citizens to fill these positions. [0]http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm [1]https://cis.org/estimating-h1b-population-2-11 https://cis.org/estimating-h1b-population-2-11
    - _of 13y ago
      Look at any academic institution in the US in the life sciences. If you would take away the Europeans and Asians, what would be left?
      - a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
        The field would become more attractive to Americans and they would fill the empty places.
        13y ago

by gdilla 13y ago

akgerber 13y ago

As an American citizen, at least half of my employers have had at least one immigrant founder— immigration seems like a big contributor to the US' excellence in high tech. But H-1B visas aren't great for me, since they give so much more leverage to the employer and not the employee— just giving green cards or work visas to skilled immigrants would be much better.

sigkill 13y ago
Aren't H1B work visa? But I think your idea of the green card is pretty good to return the balance of employer/employee leverage. I wonder what abuses that might have though.
- eshvk 13y ago
  I think what the parent implies by "work visa" is a visa that is not tied to the employer. The H1B as it stands now is just a proxy for indentured labor.
  - goshx 13y ago
    right, that requirement to be tied to the employer is also what prevents the H1B to run its own company (although H1B can start a business, (s)he is not allowed to run it.)
  - kosievdmerwe 13y ago
    > indentured labour. Could you explain, I'm not sure how this is the case?
    - eshvk 13y ago
      Sure. The way the H1B works is that it is tied to your employer. The employer knows this. You know it. This creates leverage on the part of the employer. How? Two ways: One, you get fired, you are out of status immediately, you have to leave the country ASAP or find a job immediately. So, you make sure you don't get fired. Two, an H1B employee is supposed to be paid the prevailing job market rate. For CA, San Francisco County, the max is around 100K. It is a pretty sum. BUT. It is also less than market rate as of six months ago (when I was job hunting). Now, most big companies don't need to exploit you. But a wily manager can easily fuck with you with enough awareness of the issue. Personally, I have noticed this phenomenon at smaller companies where a H1B candidate is potentially more attractive. I got a green card very recently, however, I am obviously not an American and am relatively young enough that I can be suspected of not having a Green Card. I have had a few situations where hiring managers were rather disappointed that I didn't need their help to acquire an H1B or for them to file for my green card.
kosievdmerwe 13y ago
How does an H-1B give leverage to the employer? You can change jobs, you just have to get your new employer to notify the state that they are now your employer.

avar 13y ago

The Netherlands even gives you a tax discount for 10 years if you're a highly skilled migrant, the criteria for being able to apply for it basically comes down to "is this person likely to need welfare? No? They get lower taxes then": http://www.expatica.com/nl/finance_business/tax/The-Dutch-30-percent-ruling_explained_11398.html http://www.expatica.com/nl/finance_business/tax/The-Dutch-30... It makes sense for states to enact programs like these for the reasons you pointed out. If you can get skilled migrants you get net contributors from day one.

judk 13y ago
It seems counterproductive to the point of welfare to have the people who need welfare pay for it. It isn't an insurance policy.
- avar 13y ago
  No that's not what this policy does. For the sake of argument (and simplicity) let's say that schooling and other childhood / early adult expenses for the average citizen cost the state $100,000, and let's say that in return the state is likely to gain $200,000 in tax money back from citizens over their lifetime once they become productive members of society. It's pretty obvious that if you give adult immigrants who can immediately become contributing members of the economy a 1/3 tax discount that the state loses nothing, and only stands to gain from the deal, since they never had to pay those $100,000 to send them to school as children, that cost was offloaded to some other nation-state. The tax contribution of those immigrants to social programs like welfare is also going to be just the same as the contributions of native citizens, despite the lower tax rate, because the state isn't also using that tax money to pay for those $100,000 it never spent. If anything the flaw in the Dutch policy is that the tax discount isn't large enough, should last for more than 10 years (i.e. indefinitely, and should be larger if you promise to get out of the country before retirement), and that they should offer it to more immigrants, not just the highly skilled.
- fennecfoxen 13y ago
  The welfare state has a limitation: it needs to be paid for. It also has a consequence: people who seek welfare may attempt to move to the welfare state in order to obtain it. This may imperil the ability of the state to pay for the welfare - or, at least, the willingness of the taxpayers to fund that welfare. So this impacts immigration policy. Insofar as the welfare state IS like an insurance policy, this is like the health insurance company denying coverage for a pre-existing condition.

djb_hackernews 13y ago

I'll provide a counter argument. The foreign workers aren't actually that high skilled and their education is questionable. So upon their first paycheck they are displacing local workers who could also do the job, putting extra pressure on local economies that they didn't "pay into", and giving more power to employers based on the restrictive nature of these foreign worker visas.

ulfw 13y ago
Yea. Because all locals are so highly educated. Have you seen CS departments at major school in the US? Look at the demographics and then think again.
- djb_hackernews 13y ago
  I'm honestly not sure what point you are trying to make. That US CS programs aren't as rigorous as foreign programs? That US CS programs aren't also filled with foreign students, further displacing and out pricing citizens? My point is, we have 1.7 Million college educated grads currently unemployed[0]. We have an estimated 650,000 H1B workers[1]. I'd say we have plenty of educated, hard working, and able citizens to fill these positions. [0]http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm [1]https://cis.org/estimating-h1b-population-2-11 https://cis.org/estimating-h1b-population-2-11
  - _of 13y ago
    Look at any academic institution in the US in the life sciences. If you would take away the Europeans and Asians, what would be left?
    - a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
      The field would become more attractive to Americans and they would fill the empty places.
      - 13y ago