I also don't hire for "American" jobs. They are just jobs and if you can do it, I don't care about your race, ethnicity, origin, preference of Star Trek to Star Wars, etc. On a macro level, I believe there's more value to the US with the foreign nationals bringing their labor and keeping its products here rather than competing with US companies from overseas. Let's not forget that these foreign nationals pay taxes and spend money in the US as well.
H1Bs (and O-visas, etc.) tend to be more expensive than otherwise just hiring someone local. I'm not looking for someone cheap, as other commenters have infuriatingly speculated. In fact, I actually think that's a very dangerous path to go down, as you'll either find
1. Someone who isn't very good (or else they wouldn't work for sub-market rates) 2. Someone who is very good, but doesn't know their value - in which case, you'll lose out on your investment once they find you've been screwing them over.
I also don't understand why - if I like someone enough - I can't just hire them to come work in the US, regardless of national origin, assuming I pay enough. I suppose there's a danger of pay-for-play there, but I can't believe the trouble I've had working with amazingly talented people because they didn't have a recognized masters degree.
Finally, `exercise your duty to your own country` is an inherently suspect phrase that makes me suspicious about the thought process behind that lead up to it.
It has long been understood in the U.S. that pulling workers from remote areas strongly depresses local wages. You don't want any tightness in labor supply. You also don't want your workers to organize, since again, this causes tightness in labor supply. The transcontinental railroads brought in Chinese workers, not because they were superlative workers or in any way superior at driving track spikes than the Irish were, but only to drive down the wages demanded by the Irish. Today farms prefer Mexican workers, not because locals can't pick apples, but only because it drives down the wages demanded. This cycle repeats throughout history.
And this is why wages for programmers, etc., haven't gone up at all in the last 15 years (and probably never will again). The supply of programmer labor is being managed to always exceed the local demand, keeping wages flat.
H1-B = 62'000 Visa allocated per years
Last Oct about 160'000 new jobs where created in the US (270'000 during the month of June for example).
Under Obama (8 years) 9 million jobs were created total, which is above 1 million jobs per year. So, 8 x 62'000 = 496'000 H1-B under Obama. Versus 9 million new jobs in the US...
While OP's post isn't a very good one, you can't throw numbers like that at it. How many of those 9 million jobs are fulfilling, full time, well paying , etc. Isn't underemployment a big problem in the US?
Majority of the Dev community in the San Francisco Bay Area (for example) is of Asian/Indian descent. We're not even talking about foreigners here. Children of immigrants (immigrants who probably came through H1-B) - the second generation, American citizens.
So, bringing people via H1-B actually helps fulfilling "high-level" jobs with American citizens. Does it make sense?
While your overall argument is sound, I must point out that it is actually 85000, which includes the special category of MS and above in a STEM field.
This quota also does not include the academic H-1 - there is no quota for that (but numbers are probably low anyway).
Your number also doesn't include the L-1 visa.
1) http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/employed-perso...
2) http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/full-time-empl...
3) http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/part-time-empl...
Obama did create jobs (given how many trillions of dollars he spent, one should hope so), but not nearly the amount you're reporting. The only way to get your numbers is to count every job anyone did for even a single day as a newly created job, and totally discount all layoffs.
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net...
https://www.thebalance.com/cultural-diversity-3306201 https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/diversity/m...
On the flip side, they do not challenge authority when they know a better way to do something, their educational foundation is not as solid because of too much focus on rote memorization, and tend to let interpersonal problems fester instead of escalating because they cannot imagine speaking out of their place in the hierarchy.
The top tier of Home country employees are great, but once you get to the lower part of tier 2 and tier 3, they tend to have an attitude of "what can the company do for me?" , Instead of "What can I do for the company?" And they start feeling like dead weight.
Of course these are all generalizations and there are exceptions everywhere to what I have said.
There has never been a large enough talent pool of highly skilled people working in gaming. We still need to find them all over the world. Europe and Russia have a lot of very smart, underpayed devs. Every visa worker I've worked with has been very skilled, loved living and working in the US, and most were trying to become highly skilled, highly paid, highly-tax-paying citizens of the US.
Before the inevitable "you'd find more people if you paid more", I've seen the numbers of many, many games. 90% of the non-marketing budget goes to non-management devs already. Games are notorious for being difficult to be profitable already. Customer awareness is the biggest challenge of profitability. So... if you have any suggestions on where to get more money to pay devs, I'd love to hear them.
Now ask Microsoft, RedHat, Google, Intel (and others) why are they hiring H1Bs and you might have a surprise