Donald Trump

Trump Lied His Way to the Truth on Foreign Techies

Foreign STEM workers don't threaten American jobs or wages or apple pie

|

The Wednesday night Republican debate exposed Donald Trump as a bald-faced liar – yet again. Without blinking an

Donald Trump Mouth
Todd Krainin

eye-lid, he declared – twice – that he had no idea – NO IDEA WHATSOEVER—where CNBC moderator Becky Quick had heard that he had accused Sen. Rubio of being the personal senator of Mark Zuckerberg for pushing more high-tech visas. "I never said that. I never said that," he insisted.

As it turned out he did, in so many words – right there on page four of his white paper on immigration under the section: "Put American Workers First." Not just that, his paper also noted: "We graduate two times more Americans with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) degrees each year than can find jobs" – implying that America had no need for more foreign techies.

Although Trump lied,  I note in my column at The Week, at least this time he lied himself out of restrictionist nonsense and into the right position.

Restrictionists have long claimed that Zuckerberg and the Silicon Valley crowd, who lobby for more tech workers to be let into the U.S., are doing so not to alleviate any "shortage" of technical talent, but to shore up profits by driving down native wages. But the notion that without foreign techies native wages would rise is a complete fantasy based on rather crude notions of supply and demand. The truth, actually, is the opposite.

Read the whole thing here.

Advertisement

NEXT: World Could Still Keep Future Man-Made Warming Below 2 Degrees Celsius

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The short version,hidden among the insults, is Shikha Dalia says Trump is right.

    1. My phone corrects “Dalmia” to “Dalia”

      1. As in “Black”*? Therefore….

        RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACIST!!!

        *Yes, yes, I know there’s an “h” in dahlia….just go with it for teh joke!

    2. The short version,hidden among the insults, is Shikha Dalia says Trump is right.

      Do you realize you said that in public? Proof of both Trump’s and Carson’s lies are springing up all over.

  2. ” But the notion that without foreign techies native wages would rise is a complete fantasy based on rather crude notions of supply and demand. The truth, actually, is the opposite.”

    So there are times when increasing the supply of something increases its price. OK then.

    1. There’s more than a whiff of strawman in Shikha’s formulation.

      I believe that what is really being argued isn’t that tech wages are down. Its that, absent foreign imports, they would be up more than they are.

      1. Actually I suspect it wouldn’t impact wages very much at all but it would increase employment by more than the number of H1B’s allowed because it would force companies to accept hiring people with slightly less than the perfect experience and then allow them to learn on the job

      2. It’s a complex picture. Being at the sort-of-ground-zero on this debate, wages for domestic tech workers are, in my estimation, higher than ever. Too high (in some sectors) in fact. This in turn increases the demand for foreign tech workers and more importantly, outsourcing.

        When a 22 yr old networking engineer is earning $145,000 a year, one can reasonably conclude that domestic tech ages are certainly on the rise.

        1. Good point. So perhaps American tech graduate production isn’t keeping up with demand.

          1. I couldn’t say. What I can say is there is a lot of competition to hire techworkers of all stripes which seems to indicate a high-demand/low supply condition.

  3. I get more icked out by that picture of Trump’s orifice than a Sugarfree tract.

    1. Wait, that’s Trump? I thought it was a plecostomus.

      1. Well, they’re both bottom feeders, so….

  4. Live Free[er]?

    Dear Reason reader,

    one of the most personal freedom- damaging beliefs you can have [one of many :-)] , is the belief in the necessity of political involvement – to supposedly “improve” your life via the political process.

    Fact: as an individual you will _never_ enjoy a freer life for yourself until you completely reject the “drug”, “religion” [ or whatever else you want to call it] known as “political activism” or “involvement”, in its entirety.

    It is nothing more than a trap- a dead end that ultimately _decreases_ your chances for more personal freedom and happiness in this world.

    Regards, onebornfree.
    Personal Freedom Consulting:
    http://www.onebornfree.blogspot.com

    1. YARR AND YE’LL NEVER BE FREER THAN WHEN YE REALIZE THAT 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB

    2. YARRR, MATEYS! HE TOTALLY BE AN ANARCHIST PIRATE! TOTALLY! YARRR!

    3. HERC’s cousin?

      1. [NOT] [enough] [square] [BRACKETS] [and] [capS]

        1. Yeah, this is me just being hopeful. I loved HERC.

  5. Shika is so wrong on this I don’t even know where to start.

    First off most people who oppose H1B’s do so not because it increases the labor supply but because of the way the H1B visa system is structured it makes them infinitely more valuable to the company than someone with a green card or a citizen. You have a worker that you might pay the same, but he can’t quit and he can’t demand a raise, they are borderline indentured servants. Which is not to mean they should be pitied, obviously the deal they get on an H1B is significantly better than anything they could get at home.

    Second, no they do not provide “hard to find skills” that is a convenient fiction that executives tell themselves. The reality is the skills are really easy to find, you just need to give someone the time and opportunity to acquire them, what they DO do is make it easier for the executives to be lazy, rather than just hiring whatever local talent is available regardless of the technology stack they are most proficient with and giving them time to learn the one you use (any developer I have ever worked with that was worth hiring was easily able to move to new technology stacks with a fairly short learning curve) they just go out and find someone with the right buzzwords on their resume (which the foreign consulting firms ensure they have).

    1. Third, still the demand for IT workers is sufficient that there are plenty of jobs for THOSE WITH DEGREES, but what about those without a degree. Time was in IT you could start off in Customer Service and work your way up through Tech Support to QA and finally move into a development or similar role. Companies don’t do that anymore, they just take the shortcut and hire the guy from India so no the effect does not show up in the numbers when you look at college graduates, what it does do however is lock those who didn’t go to college or graduate from college for whatever reason in low paying jobs and closes off one of the last avenues to a high paying jobs for middle class Americans.

      Open Immigration is fine, the H1B program however is an abomination that needs to end.

      1. DEY TUK RRR JERRRBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!Q!!111!

        1. Do you need your eyes checked because apparently you are having a hard time reading.

          I made it abundantly clear that I was fine with actual immigration, my objection is to the H1 program specifically.

          Get rid fo the H1 program and let those same people come here and compete on an level footing and I haver no issue with it.

          1. Lighten up, Francis

        2. The reality is the skills are really easy to find, you just need to give someone the time and opportunity to acquire them, what they DO do is make it easier for the executives to be lazy, rather than just hiring whatever local talent is available regardless of the technology stack they are most proficient with and giving them time to learn the one you use (any developer I have ever worked with that was worth hiring was easily able to move to new technology stacks with a fairly short learning curve)

          Rasilio is 100% correct on this. This is a line that’s passed off by corporate execs and hiring managers to justify hiring H1Bs. As someone who’s been in the tech/IT fields before they called it IT, there has been a major industry shift and it seems to center around hiring “certified” black boxes (racist!) that fit into a neatly packaged set of HR requirements. Remember how I disparage the modern HR department? This is partially why.

          Seriously experienced tech people who have been in the industry for decades and have the battle scars to prove it are often passed over for younger people fuck-fresh off the turnip truck who have this or that certification and zero experience. As a result, countries like India are churning out these people in cert mills like you wouldn’t believe.

          It’s not a problem with Immigrants taking our jerbs, the the fault of lazy corporate hiring managers who turned IT employment into checking boxes in a spreadsheet.

    2. You have a worker that you might pay the same, but he can’t quit and he can’t demand a raise, they are borderline indentured servants.

      This cannot be emphasized enough. It is difficult and risky for an H1B holder to try to change jobs, and can require such bizarre rituals as leaving the country and re-entering, re-appying for permission for your family to live here, etc.

    3. I’ve noticed not in info- but in bio-tech (& elsewhere) that hiring’s become ridiculously specific that way. Rather than hiring generally smart & competent people who could probably pick up the specific skills required in a week on the job, they’re looking for someone who’s done exactly the same job. That’s going to take them longer to find than it would’ve taken to just hire somebody smart w general familiarity in the area, so go figure. Some of it has to do w the separation in even medium size enterprises between those in charge of hiring & those in charge of actually employing the person. Those who’ll need to work w the person have to specify as far as they can the job to the people doing the hiring.

      1. Then the person they hire ends up leaving soon anyway because most people don’t want to remain stagnant and do the same exact thing forever. Employers can be really short-sighted about hiring.

      2. When I interview (for developer positions) it’s always someone in India and I can usually assume they have some skills. So all I’m looking for is someone I can understand and get along with and as long as they’re not bullshitting me they’re hired.

      3. w the separation in even medium size enterprises between those in charge of hiring & those in charge of actually employing the person.

        H fucking Are.

        When HR stuck itself between the person who needs the position and the person needed, it all went downhill. They should have relegated themselves to emailing PDFs of the company benefits. Instead, they convinced management that they and they alone could find the correct candidate for technical fields beyond their comprehension. And often, they even resort to full on tea-leaf reading and voodoo.

  6. Slightly OT…here is some heartwarming news concerning immigration

    WASHINGTON (AP) ? Hundreds of immigrant families caught illegally crossing the Mexican border told U.S. immigration agents they made the dangerous journey in part because they believed they would be permitted to stay in the United States and collect public benefits, according to internal intelligence files from the Homeland Security Department.

    1. Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said the rising number of border crossings by families and children was due to “push factors” in Central America, such as crime and violence. He said the Obama administration wants to invest $1 billion in Central America to address the underlying problems that push families and children out of Central America.
      “We need to expand on this and … we need to make the hard investment,” Johnson said Thursday at an academic conference at the Georgetown University Law Center.

      http://apnews.myway.com/articl…..a163d.html

      So we are gonna “invest” over a billion dollars in South America and then the South Americans won’t want to come here ?

      BRILLIANT !!!1111 What could possibly go wrong ?

      1. Also, what the actual FUCK kind of name is “Jeh” anyway? It’s like mom and dad got caught mid-sentence when trying to say “Jebediah” or “Jerry” or something.

        Never trust anyone name of “Jeh”.

        1. I knew someone named J. Just J and nothing else. No period, doesn’t stand for anything

      2. He said the Obama administration wants to invest $1 billion in Central America to address the underlying problems that push families and children out of Central America.

        Kind of like when the ATF invested in the self-defense needs of drug cartels? I have high hopes!

      3. Oh geez, illegals believe they’re eligible for government benefits, so all the wackos will assume it’s true.

        So we are gonna “invest” over a billion dollars in South America and then the South Americans won’t want to come here ? BRILLIANT !!!1111 What could possibly go wrong ?

        What are the alternatives and what would they cost?

        1. Actually there are some benefits that illegals are entitled to.

          Additionally some jurisdictions don’t ask, or by law are forbidden to ask about the immigration status of an applicant.

          1. Actually there are some benefits that illegals are entitled to.

            Such as?

            Additionally some jurisdictions don’t ask, or by law are forbidden to ask about the immigration status of an applicant.

            Then it’s a local decision. Are you opposed to federalism? Hoiw do those dollars compare with the profit we make, nationwide, on FICA taxes which cannot provide benefits?

            We fought a revolution over, among other things, taxation without representation. Illegals pay the same taxes as legal residents, taxed without representation. Is that even American?

        2. “so all the wackos will assume it’s true.”

          You have that backwards. I have seen it with my own eyes.

          There are businesses all around Houston offering fake IDs. One illegal was just recently arressted in Houston for presenting her fake Texas ID at a Doctors office even though she didn’t need to because her illegal husband had insurance through his job that he got with a fake SS number.

          Many of the men work for cash and their wives get all the government cheese they can since they don’t claim to be married and there is no way to prove otherwise.

          You’re either very naive about the subject or willingly ignorant.

          1. You have that backwards.

            You misread what I wrote.

            Many of the men work for cash and their wives get all the government cheese they can since they don’t claim to be married and there is no way to prove otherwise.

            They haven’t done free cheese in decades. And why would they have to “prove otherwise”?

            You’re either very naive about the subject or willingly ignorant.

            That from somebody who misread what I said … and ignored the context … thus missing the point entirely … Consequently, you’ve said that illegals get benefits because illegals say they do, Was that naive or was it willful?

  7. Well done. Proof of Trump’s and Carson’s lies are popping up all over! And NOT in just the liberal,media, so that excuse is still lame.

    How many of these puppets know that CNBC is NOT a liberal site?

  8. Shikha Dalia,

    Question:

    Do aliens admitted on a F-1 and J-1 visas have to pay social security taxes and are their employers required to pay the employers’ share of FICA taxes? Doesn’t this seem to place US workers at a disadvantage relative to their foreign counterparts?

    1. Do aliens admitted on a F-1 and J-1 visas have to pay social security taxes and are their employers required to pay the employers’ share of FICA taxes?

      Of course.

      Doesn’t this seem to place US workers at a disadvantage relative to their foreign counterparts?

      1) How so?
      2) What does that have to do with illegals?
      3) Illegal aliens pay the taxes but are denied benefits, so they subsidize us.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.