4 ms·

It sounds perverse to say this, but the first thought I have is all the marriages that will be specifically arranged to take advantage of this. Seems like a cle

by lmg643 12y ago

It sounds perverse to say this, but the first thought I have is all the marriages that will be specifically arranged to take advantage of this. Seems like a clever loophole to increase the number of visas, while casting it as a benevolent change that makes it easier to retain talent. I'm not a big fan of letting employers make immigration decisions. There's too much of an incentive to try to get low cost labor, which subsidizes stupid business practices. Sure, employers could invest in automation and smarter operating procedures, or we can just plug the hole as cheaply as possible. H1Bs are unlikely to be big entrepreneurial catalysts because they are effectively tied to their employer and in a tricky legal framework. Honestly - I thought that was the whole point of the visa. And not to too much of a snob here, but the three immigrants mentioned in the Fortune 500 were all graduates of elite american universities (Andy Grove - Berkeley, Jerry Yang, Sergey - Stanford), which proves mostly nothing about the visa program. I think a much better policy for America is to allow the top 50-100 universities by US News to determine who is qualified to enter. those measures are not perfect, but it is rate-limited by the size of their degree programs and they have an incentive to keep the quality of admitted applicants high.

JoeAltmaier 12y ago
How about letting people decide for themselves? Not corporations, not universities. If people get married and get jobs, success! What other measure is needed?
shas3 12y ago
In the current H1B system, it doesn't matter if the applicant is from an elite US university. If you have to work in the US, and if you are not a permanent resident or US citizen, you go through, for the most part, the exact same H1B system as everyone else. The only difference is, if you have a masters or higher degree, your H1B visa processing is done through a separate quota. In today's system, unless you are a PhD with many publications in prestigious conferences/journals, etc., straight out of college (i.e., BS or MS), permanent residency is a long and highly bureaucratic process for most applicants. So essentially, your spouse cannot work till you get a green card. Here is an interesting story about an early Google employee highlighting this problem: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/business/12immig.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/business/12immig.html?page... Also, in 2014, people are not as desperate to live and work in the US as you think, to arrange marriages for this sole purpose. Further, this rule-change applies to that subset of H1B workers who are on track to get green cards. Employment-based green cards could take even 10 years to be processed because of purely administrative and bureaucratic delays. Besides, the H1B workers affected by this rule are usually highly skilled and are likely to have similar quality of life if they lived and worked in their home country. When you take this into account, the loophole-theory that you talk about jumps into the realm of paranoid conspiracy theory. (IANAL)
- lmg643 12y ago
  I like the early Google employee example - of course, let's cherry pick the best-of-the-best, and just assume everyone in the sample is of that caliber. I am fine with citizenship or automatic green cards for accepted Harvard students. That's a pretty prestigious designation and very hard to obtain. Harvard does not give out slots lightly. However, there are a lot of degree granting institutions in the US with lower standards, such that I don't think all universities should have that privilege. I have worked with dozens of H1B employees. It's really stupid to ask - since they are here working - but it occasionally is discussed whether they would consider going home. I think the answer is usually - maybe - when I'm ready to retire. The opportunities here are still "on average" better - and it's not just "the economy" - infrastructure, rule of law, space-to-people ratio, etc.
  - shas3 12y ago
    Your accusation of cherry-picking is disingenuous. It is just this: in the current system, there is no way of rewarding merit. That NY Times example is one data point. A second one is this, from Newsweek: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:88OoGNMeneUJ:www.newsweek.com/story-one-mans-immigration-ordeal-66537+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:88OoGN... . The USCIS has decided that one measure of the 'worthiness' or 'best-of-the-best'ness is workers who are valuable enough for a company to be applying for the green-card on their behalf. The best-of-the-best, the talented workers (whether they are from Harvard or No-name Indian Engineering Institute- is immaterial) are put in the same pile as the 'mass-H1Bs'. This is a problem that is inherent to complex irrational bureaucracies like the American immigration system. I don't see how you can classify people based on which university they go to. A person may be talented in spite of the university they go to, and this is a question that a company or a VC has to answer. So what if H1B workers intend on staying in the US? It is the individual's choice. If you want to go deeper into the question of 'who deserves H1Bs', you need to answer question scuh as, what is the purpose of nationality? Why is an American citizen more eligible to work in the US, than say, a Chinese or an Indian citizen? Is there something superior about 'American'ness? Is it because the domicile's parents and grandparents paid taxes? But what makes the domicile entitled to the fruits of the labors of their parents and grandparents? And so on.

by lmg643 12y ago

JoeAltmaier 12y ago

How about letting people decide for themselves? Not corporations, not universities. If people get married and get jobs, success! What other measure is needed?

shas3 12y ago

In the current H1B system, it doesn't matter if the applicant is from an elite US university. If you have to work in the US, and if you are not a permanent resident or US citizen, you go through, for the most part, the exact same H1B system as everyone else. The only difference is, if you have a masters or higher degree, your H1B visa processing is done through a separate quota. In today's system, unless you are a PhD with many publications in prestigious conferences/journals, etc., straight out of college (i.e., BS or MS), permanent residency is a long and highly bureaucratic process for most applicants. So essentially, your spouse cannot work till you get a green card. Here is an interesting story about an early Google employee highlighting this problem: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/business/12immig.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/business/12immig.html?page... Also, in 2014, people are not as desperate to live and work in the US as you think, to arrange marriages for this sole purpose. Further, this rule-change applies to that subset of H1B workers who are on track to get green cards. Employment-based green cards could take even 10 years to be processed because of purely administrative and bureaucratic delays. Besides, the H1B workers affected by this rule are usually highly skilled and are likely to have similar quality of life if they lived and worked in their home country. When you take this into account, the loophole-theory that you talk about jumps into the realm of paranoid conspiracy theory. (IANAL)

lmg643 12y ago
I like the early Google employee example - of course, let's cherry pick the best-of-the-best, and just assume everyone in the sample is of that caliber. I am fine with citizenship or automatic green cards for accepted Harvard students. That's a pretty prestigious designation and very hard to obtain. Harvard does not give out slots lightly. However, there are a lot of degree granting institutions in the US with lower standards, such that I don't think all universities should have that privilege. I have worked with dozens of H1B employees. It's really stupid to ask - since they are here working - but it occasionally is discussed whether they would consider going home. I think the answer is usually - maybe - when I'm ready to retire. The opportunities here are still "on average" better - and it's not just "the economy" - infrastructure, rule of law, space-to-people ratio, etc.
- shas3 12y ago
  Your accusation of cherry-picking is disingenuous. It is just this: in the current system, there is no way of rewarding merit. That NY Times example is one data point. A second one is this, from Newsweek: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:88OoGNMeneUJ:www.newsweek.com/story-one-mans-immigration-ordeal-66537+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:88OoGN... . The USCIS has decided that one measure of the 'worthiness' or 'best-of-the-best'ness is workers who are valuable enough for a company to be applying for the green-card on their behalf. The best-of-the-best, the talented workers (whether they are from Harvard or No-name Indian Engineering Institute- is immaterial) are put in the same pile as the 'mass-H1Bs'. This is a problem that is inherent to complex irrational bureaucracies like the American immigration system. I don't see how you can classify people based on which university they go to. A person may be talented in spite of the university they go to, and this is a question that a company or a VC has to answer. So what if H1B workers intend on staying in the US? It is the individual's choice. If you want to go deeper into the question of 'who deserves H1Bs', you need to answer question scuh as, what is the purpose of nationality? Why is an American citizen more eligible to work in the US, than say, a Chinese or an Indian citizen? Is there something superior about 'American'ness? Is it because the domicile's parents and grandparents paid taxes? But what makes the domicile entitled to the fruits of the labors of their parents and grandparents? And so on.