Hacker News Reader

Comment by biocomputation | Hacker News Reader

Even worse, many non-profits are exempt from the annual caps.

http://www.thenonprofittimes.com/news-articles/nonprofits-us...

"For-profit companies and many nonprofits come under a nationwide cap of 65,000 H-1B visas per year, plus 20,000 for an advanced degree exemption. Nonprofits are exempt from any cap if they are institutions of higher education; related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education; or a research organization."

I'm a lifelong Democrat (and socially and fiscally liberal) and I see this as an issue of social justice for American workers. Tech jobs are among the best paying jobs in the country, and if we're serious about income inequality then more (or very nearly all) of these jobs need to go to US citizens.

The US already has a generous immigration policy. H-1B is solely about access to cheap labor, and it should be ended immediately.

View on HN

I've spent 10 years in the US, getting my college and PhD degrees. These 10 years are the most intellectually formative period of my life, and I wholeheartedly want to contribute to the US.

As much as I abhor the H1B system, there is no other way for me to stay in the US. I'm genuinely curious -- what other options I may have in the US immigration system?

In a sense, you are correct that the US has a "generous immigration policy," e.g. babies born here get citizenship, family can easily sponsor relatives to come. However, for skilled workers, the system is very hostile.

I, too, care a lot about income inequality in the US. However, I think that solving that problem means targeting the low end of the income spectrum, i.e. giving people basic health care so they can think longer term, giving people access to education so they can learn to be productive. Giving tech jobs to Americans will help decrease inequality, but the effect will be so small.

There isn't much else for you out there, which is why I certainly don't fault would-be immigrants for using the visa.

Would you have chosen to get a PhD if you already had citizenship and freedom to choose your path in life? Certainly some people who already have US citizenship choose to do so, but many opt out. Personally, I don't think studying what high tech companies tell you to study and working for them for the salary they tell you to work for should be a condition of immigrating to the US, and I don't want to see our immigration system run through their HR departments.

As for universities, well, it's great that you enjoyed your PhD program - I personally didn't and left with a MS. I feel that PhD programs are actually pretty abusive of their students, and I would oppose giving them any control over the immigration system either. I do think one of the reason they haven't experienced their "reckoning" (ie., a collapse in new students to exploit) is that they have established themselves as the gate keepers for a kind of new ellis island for skilled immigrants, and they can collect a toll in the form of many years of cheap research and teaching labor.

Again, I do agree that you personally didn't have a lot of options, and you don't have much choice but to worth within the legal boundaries our laws established. This certainly isn't your fault, at all.

<< what other options I may have in the US immigration system?

This discussion isn't about how to immigrate to the US.

<< However, for skilled workers, the system is very hostile.

Well I'm sorry you feel that way. You could always return to your home country and fight to make things better there. That's what I'm doing by opposing H1-B - I'm fighting to make things better here.

<< Giving tech jobs to Americans will help decrease inequality, but the effect will be so small.

Right, if the effect is so small, then why is it so important to YOU?

My understanding of your post is that you think the US doesn't need more skilled immigrant workers because those jobs should go to Americans first. That's a valid argument. Attracting skilled immigrants indeed have both cost (i.e. Americans don't get those jobs) and benefit (i.e. America get the best workers and become more productive). I think the benefit outweigh the cost, and you vice versa. That's another debate entirely, which I'm not pursuing here, but I do want to recognize the validity of your argument.

The original post I made, on the other hand, is not about whether the US should attract skilled immigrants. I just wanted to clarify that the US does NOT have a generous immigrant system for skilled workers, contrary to popular perception.

> I'm a lifelong Democrat (and socially and fiscally liberal) and I see this as an issue of social justice for American workers.

Why not take this one step further and make it “white Murican workers”? Or how bout “white straight males of aryan descent”?

<< Why not take this one step further and make it “white Murican workers”? Or how bout “white straight males of aryan descent”?

American worker doesn't mean "white Murican worker". It means American citizen. American citizen isn't a synonym for Caucasian.

You're doing that thing that people do when we talk about H1-B. You're conflating opposition to H1-B with racism and xenophobia.

It's not racist or xenophobia to say that American workers should have first crack at economic opportunities in their own country. As noted in my original remarks, this is something we have to talk about if we're serious about addressing things like income inequality and equal access to economic opportunity.

I think it's utterly wrong to give the best economic opportunities to foreign nationals when there are imminently qualified US workers.

> It means American citizen.

orly? so you're excluding GC holders as well?

> You're conflating opposition to H1-B with racism and xenophobia.

I'm conflating it with nationalism. Which it is. Nationalism and racism/xenophobia and other isms/phobias come hand in hand.

> I think it's utterly wrong to give the best economic opportunities to foreign nationals when there are imminently qualified US workers.

You think wrong.

There's nothing wrong with being against laws that weaken labor's bargaining power. Productivity and wages decoupled a long time ago. It's about time the working class started fighting back. It's obvious corporations want cheap labor, and claiming there's a "skill shortage" is an easy way to achieve that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com