SoylentNews

H1-B Changes on the Horizon

posted by on Wednesday April 19 2017, @02:28PM   
from the let-'em-eat-brioche dept.

hemocyanin writes:

Trump is planning on signing an executive order on Tuesday that will cause a review of the H1-B program. It is just a review, and undoubtedly business interests will step up the pressure, but there are some interesting ideas:

"If you change that current system that awards visas randomly, without regard or skill or wage, to a skill-based awarding, it makes it extremely difficult to use the visa to replace or undercut American workers, because you're not bringing in workers at beneath the market wage," the official said. "So it's a very elegant way of solving systemic problems in the H-1B guest worker visa."

Breitbart of course has an article out (though it reads like they need to hire some native speaking editors) -- still, recent college grads face a huge hurdle:

The federal government releases little data on the many different guest-worker programs, but the available evidence says the national population of white-collar contract workers is up to 1.5 million. That population is roughly twice the population of 800,000 Americans who graduate from college with skilled degrees each year.

And finally, lest people forget that progressives also have issues with H1-B visas, here is Bernie Sanders (a decade ago of course) attacking this ploy to make sure money only trickles up by ensuring low wages. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR9QdQIKqMc

[Ed Note: Trump did sign the executive order at a photo op in Wisconsin.]

---

Original Submission

• Re:Your question is a variation of "Change Overnig Re:Your question is a variation of "Change Overnig (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @02:21AM (1 child)

  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @02:21AM (#496664)

  Nations are ever at war.

  Thus would sovereign citizens ever be at war, until they banded together into villages, then city-states, then nations, then we're right back to the beginning.

  I believe the best way to argue for your ideal to be workable is to argue that men can become angels.

  Parent

• No, "men can become angels" is argument for gov (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @10:56AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @10:56AM (#496793)

  • Firstly, you're the one supporting a monopoly on imposition (violent imposition, no less); so, you are the one who would require men to be angels—the ideas of which I speak are a direct acknowledgement that men are not angels, and therefore cannot be trusted with such a monopoly.

  • Secondly, Bastiat wrote the following around 1848: [bastiat.org]

    The claims of these organizers of humanity raise another question which I have often asked them and which, so far as I know, they have never answered: If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? The organizers maintain that society, when left undirected, rushes headlong to its inevitable destruction because the instincts of the people are so perverse. The legislators claim to stop this suicidal course and to give it a saner direction. Apparently, then, the legislators and the organizers have received from Heaven an intelligence and virtue that place them beyond and above mankind; if so, let them show their titles to this superiority.

    They would be the shepherds over us, their sheep. Certainly such an arrangement presupposes that they are naturally superior to the rest of us. And certainly we are fully justified in demanding from the legislators and organizers proof of this natural superiority.

    Please understand that I do not dispute their right to invent social combinations, to advertise them, to advocate them, and to try them upon themselves, at their own expense and risk. But I do dispute their right to impose these plans upon us by law—by force—and to compel us to pay for them with our taxes.

  Parent