3 ms·

>I'd describe it a bit differently. Of course you would. >I'm curious to see if anyone can cook up an argument why protectionism against orange, white and gre

>I'd describe it a bit differently. Of course you would. >I'm curious to see if anyone can cook up an argument why protectionism against orange, white and green is morally justified, but protectionism against black is not. Four aspects of the debate that the, uh... 'curious' tend to misrepresent or outright ignore: * Race-baiting doesn't change the fact that at its heart it is about wages vs. profits. * H1Bs are not just about bringing in workers. They are also about giving employers the power to fuck those they bring over by linking their immigration status to their job. This isn't just bad for them. * The effects of brain drain on 3rd world countries where the brightest people flee to richer countries. * Brain drain is not just about losing the brightest people but also about losing the (often large) investment in their education paid for by the 3rd world, that the 1st world gets the whole benefit of.

grinnbearit 12y ago
H1Bs are the only option for several potential immigrants around the world, I'm all for breaking this link but only if a better option existed. > The effects of brain drain on 3rd world countries where the brightest people flee to richer countries. > Brain drain is not just about losing the brightest people but also about losing the (often large) investment in their education paid for by the 3rd world, that the 1st world gets the whole benefit of. Apart from the nationalistic idea that anyone owes the State that controls the land they're born in by default, most of these H1B immigrants in these 3rd world countries get very little government support, at least compared to what you'd see in Europe or America and you wouldn't prevent any of "their" citizens from leaving would you?
- crdoconnor 12y ago
  >Apart from the nationalistic idea that anyone owes the State that controls the land they're born in by default, most of these H1B immigrants in these 3rd world countries get very little government support Many get a lot, actually. Especially in ex-soviet countries. Many have excellent free education systems. >you wouldn't prevent any of "their" citizens from leaving would you? Of course not. Nonetheless, the idea that freedom of immigration is an unparalleled good for the country providing the immigrants simply because individually they are better off, should die already.
  - machinshin_ 12y ago
    >> Apart from the nationalistic idea that anyone owes the State that controls the land they're born in by default, most of these H1B immigrants in these 3rd world countries get very little government support > Many get a lot, actually. Especially in ex-soviet > countries. Many have excellent free education systems. As the son of a poor indian who became a Fulbright scholar and came to the US for his Masters' degree & made a life here, i can say that at least in the case of India this isn't quite true. In India at least you had to fight the system tooth & nail to succeed. I suspect that's less true nowadays though
  - grinnbearit 12y ago
    > Many get a lot, actually. Especially in ex-soviet countries. Many have excellent free education systems. Would you be ok with immigrants from countries where they don't? India provides very little in comparison and also has the highest percentage of H1B applicants. [1] > Of course not. Nonetheless, the idea that freedom of immigration is an unparalleled good for the country providing the immigrants simply because individually they are better off, should die already. Shouldn't the State make it more attractive for these citizens to stay there? Especially since they're so valuable? Why is it only the citizens who have this responsibility. [1] http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/skilled-immigrants http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/skilled-immigrants.
yummyfajitas 12y ago
Jim Crow laws were also about wages vs profits. White people wanted to not have their wages lowered via competition with blacks. The racist components of the New Deal were almost entirely economic. If you want to alter the H1B program, I'm all for auctioning off work permits. That's not an argument to eliminate H1B, that's merely an argument to replace it. I'm arguing against eliminating/reducing it and comparing many of those who favor it to Jim Crow types. As for "brain drain", the same can happen with the black community. A black person may get a good job in white America and then leave his predominantly black neighborhood. He might then marry a white woman and never look back. Oh noes! Similarly, a black person who attends Howard University and then works as a plastic surgeon for rich white women has also had his investment paid for by the black community, but the first world is getting the whole benefit. (Yeah, isn't it a bit disconcerting when I describe the black community the way you describe a nation?) And again, like I said, these are all empirical criteria. Even if you have exact thresholds in each criteria which India currently satisfies but "Black America" does not, one could easily imagine a future where Black America does cross those thresholds. Should we bring back segregation at that time, and require black Americans to get a B1B visa to live and work in white America? If you oppose this, then your stated criteria are not your real ones.
- crdoconnor 12y ago
  >If you want to alter the H1B program, I'm all for auctioning off work permits. Of course you are. I'm sure you don't believe there are any social issues that cannot be solved with the healing power of the holy market. >Similarly, a black person who attends Howard University and then works as a plastic surgeon for rich white women has also had his investment paid for by the black community, but the first world is getting the whole benefit. * Black Americans (whom I assume you are referring to) live in the first world, which reaps the benefit of their education it paid for. * Education for black Americans is largely paid for by the state and indirectly paid for and supported by citizens of the United States. I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective.
  - yummyfajitas 12y ago
    Choosing "first world" rather than "white America" is a completely arbitrary division of humanity. I'm asking why a nationalistic division is legitimate but a racial one is not. Let me again point out - you've brought up a bunch of empirical criteria. Suppose the situation changes and black Americans suddenly satisfy those empirical criteria. Do you favor imposing the same restrictions on them that we impose on Indians? For example, if the educational funding situation changes, and most black people are educated via black people-funded community organizations, would requiring visas before we allow them to work be acceptable? If not, why is it acceptable to do this to Indians and Haitians? Are you merely taking the legitimacy of the nation state as some moral first principle? I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective. Ah yes - dislike what someone has to say, so hint that they are racist. I'm currently interpreting your comment as being intended in a somewhat hostile manner. Am I correct in doing so?
peterjancelis 12y ago
Also, immigration and free trade are different things. You can be anti-H1B but still favor free trade, allowing those H1B'ers to sell their software in direct competition with US firms online if they so wish.
- MatekCopatek 12y ago
  They are two sides of the same coin. Free trade allows companies to find places where labour is cheapest and free immigration allows workers to find places where salaries are highest. IMHO, it's a bit hypocritical or at least naive to have contrasting opinions of them.
  - blfr 12y ago
    The world does not end at trade. There's a huge difference between a company from my country setting up a division somewhere else and people from another country moving into my neighbourhood. You may be fine with either one, both, neither, and even some combination depending on the particular good or person. Conflating them is disingenuous.
    - MatekCopatek 12y ago
      Both of those things actually have very serious consequences, but in case of a company setting up a division somewhere else, you're not the one being directly affected. I didn't mean to say these are simple issues, I meant to say it's hypocritical to support one and not support another, ideologically speaking.
    - ta75757 12y ago
      Socially they are different, but labor has an equal claim to "free trade" as capital for economic reasons. If you grant it only capital, labor can rightly feel screwed over. Imagine the EU, but without free movement of labor. So Western companies come into the East, buy up anything worth buying (including farmland and mineral rights) and out compete anything that's not (putting people out of work), but then a citizen in the East who wants to get a good job in the West and will do it for less than a Westerner is told to GTFO.
VLM 12y ago
"* H1Bs are not just about bringing in workers. They are also about giving employers the power to fuck those they bring over by linking their immigration status to their job. This isn't just bad for them." Just call a spade a spade. Management likes H1B because they can and do treat them like slaves, like owned property of the corporation, less than human. Nobody wants to compete with or become slaves, and its morally and ethically disgusting to support or encourage a system of slavery. Like most, I like immigrants and individual H1B holders, its the destructive system of slavery that's horrific. Simply getting rid of the whole H1B system and transferring that quota over to the "skilled trades" real-immigration quota would be a fine idea. Heck, double the number while they're at it or even remove the limit. The civil war ended in the 1860s. Its the 2010s. Isn't it time to remove slavery from the system? Must we wait longer while our brothers sit in chains?

grinnbearit 12y ago

H1Bs are the only option for several potential immigrants around the world, I'm all for breaking this link but only if a better option existed. > The effects of brain drain on 3rd world countries where the brightest people flee to richer countries. > Brain drain is not just about losing the brightest people but also about losing the (often large) investment in their education paid for by the 3rd world, that the 1st world gets the whole benefit of. Apart from the nationalistic idea that anyone owes the State that controls the land they're born in by default, most of these H1B immigrants in these 3rd world countries get very little government support, at least compared to what you'd see in Europe or America and you wouldn't prevent any of "their" citizens from leaving would you?

crdoconnor 12y ago
>Apart from the nationalistic idea that anyone owes the State that controls the land they're born in by default, most of these H1B immigrants in these 3rd world countries get very little government support Many get a lot, actually. Especially in ex-soviet countries. Many have excellent free education systems. >you wouldn't prevent any of "their" citizens from leaving would you? Of course not. Nonetheless, the idea that freedom of immigration is an unparalleled good for the country providing the immigrants simply because individually they are better off, should die already.
- machinshin_ 12y ago
  >> Apart from the nationalistic idea that anyone owes the State that controls the land they're born in by default, most of these H1B immigrants in these 3rd world countries get very little government support > Many get a lot, actually. Especially in ex-soviet > countries. Many have excellent free education systems. As the son of a poor indian who became a Fulbright scholar and came to the US for his Masters' degree & made a life here, i can say that at least in the case of India this isn't quite true. In India at least you had to fight the system tooth & nail to succeed. I suspect that's less true nowadays though
- grinnbearit 12y ago
  > Many get a lot, actually. Especially in ex-soviet countries. Many have excellent free education systems. Would you be ok with immigrants from countries where they don't? India provides very little in comparison and also has the highest percentage of H1B applicants. [1] > Of course not. Nonetheless, the idea that freedom of immigration is an unparalleled good for the country providing the immigrants simply because individually they are better off, should die already. Shouldn't the State make it more attractive for these citizens to stay there? Especially since they're so valuable? Why is it only the citizens who have this responsibility. [1] http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/skilled-immigrants http://www.bloombergview.com/quicktake/skilled-immigrants.

yummyfajitas 12y ago

Jim Crow laws were also about wages vs profits. White people wanted to not have their wages lowered via competition with blacks. The racist components of the New Deal were almost entirely economic. If you want to alter the H1B program, I'm all for auctioning off work permits. That's not an argument to eliminate H1B, that's merely an argument to replace it. I'm arguing against eliminating/reducing it and comparing many of those who favor it to Jim Crow types. As for "brain drain", the same can happen with the black community. A black person may get a good job in white America and then leave his predominantly black neighborhood. He might then marry a white woman and never look back. Oh noes! Similarly, a black person who attends Howard University and then works as a plastic surgeon for rich white women has also had his investment paid for by the black community, but the first world is getting the whole benefit. (Yeah, isn't it a bit disconcerting when I describe the black community the way you describe a nation?) And again, like I said, these are all empirical criteria. Even if you have exact thresholds in each criteria which India currently satisfies but "Black America" does not, one could easily imagine a future where Black America does cross those thresholds. Should we bring back segregation at that time, and require black Americans to get a B1B visa to live and work in white America? If you oppose this, then your stated criteria are not your real ones.

crdoconnor 12y ago
>If you want to alter the H1B program, I'm all for auctioning off work permits. Of course you are. I'm sure you don't believe there are any social issues that cannot be solved with the healing power of the holy market. >Similarly, a black person who attends Howard University and then works as a plastic surgeon for rich white women has also had his investment paid for by the black community, but the first world is getting the whole benefit. * Black Americans (whom I assume you are referring to) live in the first world, which reaps the benefit of their education it paid for. * Education for black Americans is largely paid for by the state and indirectly paid for and supported by citizens of the United States. I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective.
- yummyfajitas 12y ago
  Choosing "first world" rather than "white America" is a completely arbitrary division of humanity. I'm asking why a nationalistic division is legitimate but a racial one is not. Let me again point out - you've brought up a bunch of empirical criteria. Suppose the situation changes and black Americans suddenly satisfy those empirical criteria. Do you favor imposing the same restrictions on them that we impose on Indians? For example, if the educational funding situation changes, and most black people are educated via black people-funded community organizations, would requiring visas before we allow them to work be acceptable? If not, why is it acceptable to do this to Indians and Haitians? Are you merely taking the legitimacy of the nation state as some moral first principle? I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective. Ah yes - dislike what someone has to say, so hint that they are racist. I'm currently interpreting your comment as being intended in a somewhat hostile manner. Am I correct in doing so?

peterjancelis 12y ago

Also, immigration and free trade are different things. You can be anti-H1B but still favor free trade, allowing those H1B'ers to sell their software in direct competition with US firms online if they so wish.

MatekCopatek 12y ago
They are two sides of the same coin. Free trade allows companies to find places where labour is cheapest and free immigration allows workers to find places where salaries are highest. IMHO, it's a bit hypocritical or at least naive to have contrasting opinions of them.
- blfr 12y ago
  The world does not end at trade. There's a huge difference between a company from my country setting up a division somewhere else and people from another country moving into my neighbourhood. You may be fine with either one, both, neither, and even some combination depending on the particular good or person. Conflating them is disingenuous.
  - MatekCopatek 12y ago
    Both of those things actually have very serious consequences, but in case of a company setting up a division somewhere else, you're not the one being directly affected. I didn't mean to say these are simple issues, I meant to say it's hypocritical to support one and not support another, ideologically speaking.
  - ta75757 12y ago
    Socially they are different, but labor has an equal claim to "free trade" as capital for economic reasons. If you grant it only capital, labor can rightly feel screwed over. Imagine the EU, but without free movement of labor. So Western companies come into the East, buy up anything worth buying (including farmland and mineral rights) and out compete anything that's not (putting people out of work), but then a citizen in the East who wants to get a good job in the West and will do it for less than a Westerner is told to GTFO.

VLM 12y ago

"* H1Bs are not just about bringing in workers. They are also about giving employers the power to fuck those they bring over by linking their immigration status to their job. This isn't just bad for them." Just call a spade a spade. Management likes H1B because they can and do treat them like slaves, like owned property of the corporation, less than human. Nobody wants to compete with or become slaves, and its morally and ethically disgusting to support or encourage a system of slavery. Like most, I like immigrants and individual H1B holders, its the destructive system of slavery that's horrific. Simply getting rid of the whole H1B system and transferring that quota over to the "skilled trades" real-immigration quota would be a fine idea. Heck, double the number while they're at it or even remove the limit. The civil war ended in the 1860s. Its the 2010s. Isn't it time to remove slavery from the system? Must we wait longer while our brothers sit in chains?