|
Only 65,000 H1Bs. Any difference?
So the number of H1s is now cut to 65,000. Anyone see a difference?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/01/business/worldbusiness/01visa.html
Ready to move to India?
"But Mr. Vashistha's firm is urging clients like Cardinal Health and Exult to look at increasing the number of expatriates to help bridge the gap. 'If foreign resources cannot be brought here, then take resources from here to the offshore location,' he said."
And will Congress do more than just "look" at the L1 program?
"Congress is also looking at the L-1, which has no quotas."
Jim Rankin
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
Nope, better kick out all the immigrants too now.
fahgetaboutit
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
I'm sure I read somewhere that the proceeds (filing fees?) from H1B applicants were supposed to be available to U.S. workers for training costs.
Anyone know anything about that?
UI Designer
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
Meanwhile, the developing world has it's own Baby Boom generation coming on line.
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994253
"About 1.2 billion of the world's 6.3 billion people are aged between 10 and 19, says the report. Almost 90 per cent [!!!] of these teenagers live in the developing world."
This is probably a lot of what's driving the move of jobs offshore from the US/Europe/etc. There's a lot more ambitious young people outside those countries now than in them.
The challenge for the "developed" world is to harness these young people to pay for their retirement, as we all know that Social Security, Medicare and their European/Canadian/Japanese equivalents are big Ponzi schemes about to come crashing down as there's not enough young people in those countries to keep it going. Not sure these young people will go for it, though.
I bet a big part of these young people are Muslims, too. Looks like "developed world" foreign policy better take that into account, too.
The American Boomers had the 60s and Woodstock. How will the new Boomers change things when they come into power?
Jim Rankin
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
>There's a lot more ambitious young people outside those
>countries now than in them.
Oh geez. Personally I have nothing against companies using whoever they want. What I do dislike, however, is the deception and apparent idiocy involved. How many foreign workers PERSONALLY apply for jobs as Americans would? I don't know. I'm assuming that 0 do if they are not currently in the U.S. and less than that if they are outside the U.S. and don't even have a Visa. I think they are represented by "salesmen" who might refer to themselves differently. Those foriegners who live here and have Visas might well apply for jobs as do born/raised Americans. Why this mention of born/raised? Because American culture is unlike any other culture. Americans are extremely naive. If they read a job description and it is not a fit, MOST of them are not likely to apply for the job. So what happens? The idiots in HR publish these ridiculous job descriptions which can only be met by people who will say anything to get a job. They will say, "gosh, we put this description out but found very few people who could meet the criteria but there were thousands in India who said they met the criteria so we need to issue them Visas". Please, just say you want to reduce costs.
Me
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
I meant to emphasize the "more", not the "ambitious". In other words, it's not that young people in the West aren't ambitious. But there are a lot more ambitious young people outside the West, just due to sheer demographics.
My larger point is, as the military, economic and cultural center of the world, the West has probably peaked and is at the start of a long decline relative to the rest of the world.
Jim Rankin
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
I think we either let more people come here or let more jobs go there. I don't see any other viable (non-protectionist) option.
Which situation would you prefer:
1. no visas, so foreign workers return home and US work is outsourced to foreign countries. US workers compete with foreign workers who have much lower living costs and US dollars leave the US economy.
2. more visas, more foreign workers immigrate to US and compete for US work in America. US workers still must compete with foreign workers, but these workers must pay US living costs, US taxes, and keep US dollars in the US economy.
runtime
Wednesday, October 8, 2003
runtime,
My choice is option #1. I would rather see the American IT job market totally collapse then what it is now.
I am sick of employers treating me like I was no better than a day laborer who sits on a street corner waiting for someone to drive by and offer them work.
Thursday, October 9, 2003
what's wrong with being a day laborer?
rz
Thursday, October 9, 2003
Forced choice huh?
A sensible and realistic option that is often discussed and never considered seriously is to BAN the H1b and the L1 and then have open immigration for foreign IT workers, granting them a green card immediately, the costs of which must be born by the sponsoring employer.
This way, employers couldn't hold H1bs as high-tech slaves like they have done in recent years, paying them substandard wages knowing they can't leave.
A level playing field. What's wrong with that?
Dennis Atkins
Thursday, October 9, 2003
Germany has done that in the latest years.
They decided that they have a shortage of IT workers, and decided to allow a lot of IT workers from Eastern Europe immigrate to Germany.
Gigi Duru
Thursday, October 9, 2003
I prefer option #2. Bring more people (and jobs) to the US.
runtime
Thursday, October 9, 2003
>My larger point is, as the military, economic and cultural
>center of the world, the West has probably peaked and is
>at the start of a long decline relative to the rest of the
>world
Okay, I'm biting. Does moron come to mind. Let me see ... these people are coming to the WEST, the declining west, because ..ummm ... because even though the west is declining it is hundreds of years ahead of where they are from and this will meant hat ... ummmm ... maybe then their influx will slow the decline of the rest or increas it or have no impact or help their own country improve with their absence ... Holy cow, where do these people grow.
Me
Thursday, October 9, 2003
"Germany has done that in the latest years.
They decided that they have a shortage of IT workers, and decided to allow a lot of IT workers from Eastern Europe immigrate to Germany."
However, they limited their stay to five years, without possibility of extension. I believe that many of them will find a way to stay there, but nothing is guaranteed
Srdjan
Thursday, October 9, 2003
"... these people are coming to the WEST, the declining west, because .."
They don't need to as much anymore. We're sending the jobs and money to them.
You think the Indians and Chinese aren't capable of understanding Western science and technology? You think they don't have cultures and values far older than ours that are very robust and resilient? You think sending our intellectual property to these countries and training their young people in how we do business won't have any impact?
And the bottom line: we're talking over two billion people in just India and China alone, with economies growing a lot faster than it's possible for ours to grow. China especially is very hungry to catch up to the West, and they've finally figured out the way to do that is figure out what makes us so successful then try to do it better, or at least throw more people at it.
On top of that, there's the simple demographic fact that the generation coming into adulthood now is 90 PERCENT in the developing world! You think they won't have a lot to say about how the 21st century develops?
I'm not even saying this is a bad thing. I'm just saying it's a reality we all need to get used to.
The turning point will be when India, China, and other fast growing economies finally start to get rich. Will they still stay hungry, and want to overtake the West? Or will they get complacent once their bellies are full and the have roofs over their heads? Japan may or may not be a relevant example.
Peace be with you.
Jim Rankin
Friday, October 10, 2003
"A sensible and realistic option that is often discussed and never considered seriously is to BAN the H1b and the L1 and then have open immigration for foreign IT workers, granting them a green card immediately, the costs of which must be born by the sponsoring employer."
This gets my vote. Know any candidates I can vote for who support this?
Jim Rankin
Friday, October 10, 2003
Instant green cards, or let the H1Bs work as a time-limited green card ... instead of six years with all the restrictions of the visa, they get six years to work wherever they want, and if they want a green card allow them to apply on their own without a sponsoring employer.
As far as L1 is concerned, those visas weren't meant to be portable because they are supposed to be only for senior managers and other key personnel, not for every Joe Schmoe developer. It is similar to the key-person work permits that other countries grant to Americans and other foreigners. They just need to enforce the existing law, scrutinizing the pay, experience and responsibilities more strictly to ensure that the people are as senior as they are supposed to be.
T. Norman
Saturday, October 11, 2003
> better kick out all the immigrants too now (sarcastically)
It's not about immigrants; it's about business abusing the system to get special concessions to bring in people outside the immigration arrangements. That's what H1-B is.
> I'm sure I read somewhere that the proceeds (filing fees?) from H1B applicants were supposed to be available to U.S. workers for training costs.
To have decent politicians support the increased H1-B quotas a few years ago, business lobbyists included a provision that H1-B fees would pay to "train" Americans to fill the "desperate shortages." In practice, the training was for low-level jobs like cable installation.
again
Sunday, October 12, 2003
 Recent Topics
Fog Creek Home
| 
