Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Immigration

Vague Visa Rules Leave Laid-Off Twitter Worker Unable To Return to U.S.

Foreign-born tech workers in the U.S. have been especially vulnerable as tech giants lay off large shares of their work forces.

Fiona Harrigan | 3.25.2023 6:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
A man's silhouette in front of a U.S. visa | Illustration: Lex Villena; Doomko
(Illustration: Lex Villena; Doomko)

Late last year, Neuman Vong was planning a trip to see family in Australia. He was working for Twitter at the time, adjusting to the workplace in the wake of Elon Musk's takeover. Vong had outlasted two culls—one in November that resulted in 50 percent of Twitter staff being laid off, and another later that month following an email from Musk that demanded employees commit to being "extremely hardcore."

Vong spoke with his interim manager and new team director in December about his upcoming trip. They indicated that it wouldn't be a problem for him to work from Australia remotely, so he left the U.S. in January, first visiting Singapore and then Malaysia. There, Vong got the news that he'd been laid off after all. His interim manager had been moved to another team and his director had been fired.

The layoff would've been bad enough on its own, but because of the rules of Vong's visa, it landed him in a bureaucratic mess that now prevents him from returning to the United States. "February was hard," Vong tells Reason. "Coming to terms emotionally with staying in Australia a lot longer…how to move things out of my apartment in L.A., sell my car, and I've been trying to facilitate all of that remotely."

Vong was in the U.S. on an E-3 visa, which is reserved for highly skilled workers from Australia. Similar to the H-1B visa, another temporary visa for specialty workers, E-3 holders only have 60 days to find a new job if they're laid off. Otherwise, they have to leave the country. With mass layoffs taking place recently across the tech industry—which relies heavily on the H-1B program—thousands of foreign workers have been forced to scramble to find new work.

But Vong's case had an added layer of complexity since he was out of the country when he was laid off. "I was thinking, well, I have 60 days' grace, I'm still technically employed, maybe I can just like fly back to the U.S. right now, cancel the plans to hang with my family in January," he says. He consulted his immigration lawyer—who is also his friend—and learned that it might not be that simple. "There were all of these potential risks that plausibly could happen because of the uncertain, undefined circumstances around my unemployment, or technical unemployment," explains Vong. "None of that language matches the visa language.

Immigration officials could interpret his employment status in very different ways. On one hand, he was still technically employed, having been given "two months of a nonworking period" where he was still getting paid. On the other, he'd lost access to his company email. They could welcome him back without issue. "Or it could go the other way where it's like, 'It doesn't look like you're actively employed right now, and this visa requires you to be actively employed, so we're going to have to deny you entry,'" Vong says. An immigration officer might also feel that Vong was intentionally misrepresenting himself, which could lead to more severe penalties.

Ultimately, his lawyer warned him not to risk it. "I didn't have a reliable way to get back in," he says. Immigration lawyers interviewed by Fast Company, which covered Vong's story, indicated that he was "right to stay overseas for now."

Foreign-born tech workers have been especially vulnerable as tech giants lay off large shares of their work forces. Since last year, tech companies have laid off more than 257,000 people, according to The Wall Street Journal. Job listings in tech have declined as the industry contracts. Laid-off foreign workers have filled LinkedIn with requests for any leads, scrambling to find new jobs within the 60-day window.

In many cases, these are workers who have been in the U.S. for years or even decades. They've been in the country legally in connection with their employment, but due to long waits for green cards, many have been unable to adjust to permanent status. This is especially true for workers from India: "While there are almost half a million Indian nationals in the queue, only about 10,000 green cards a year are available for them," noted Bloomberg.

Vong started the green card application process a decade ago. He was working at Twitter then too—but got laid off, which canceled the process. After working at a few different startups, he started the green card process again, but that fell through because Vong left the company. In both cases, things might've been different if the process hadn't taken so long. "The first year of the green card process is to just do some kind of labor certification…to show that this person we're sponsoring for this has a unique set of skills that we need that we can't find on the open market," he says. "It takes a while, but I just couldn't stay at that startup" due to the climate, Vong explains.

Now based in Australia, Vong is weighing his options. "Initially, I thought I would interview, get a job, and then come back on a new visa," he says. "I've built a life there and all my friends are there…I'm paying taxes there, I'm part of communities there." But with the difficulty of securing a new tech job in the U.S. these days, he's beginning to "look at the doors that are open…rather than banging on the doors that are closed."

"I loved my time in the U.S. and I wish it was easier to stay," says Vong. "Feels like I should be able to, but for some bureaucratic reason, I can't."

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Even After Bodycam Footage Release, Questions Remain Around Alleged Shoplifter Killed by Virginia Police

Fiona Harrigan is a deputy managing editor at Reason.

ImmigrationMigrantsH-1B visasVisasBureaucracyLaborLabor MarketGreen CardsTechnologySilicon Valley
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (275)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. rbike   2 years ago

    If there is any risk then the answer is no. That is what we have succumbed to.

    1. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

      Yeah.

      I didn’t have a reliable way to get back in.

      Sure, that’s the problem I hear about all the time, we’re too good at stopping indistinguishably white/asian people from crossing the Southern *or* Northern border.

      Because immigration and naturalization *should* mean that borders are just a figment of imagination until you imagine they're preventing you from returning to the incomparable prosperity you had when you lived here and, instead, just walk away.

      Aside from the "Pity immigrants!" aspect of the article, Reason is actually being pretty self-defeating and tone deaf.

      1. Sandra (formerly OBL)   2 years ago

        "Reason is actually being pretty self-defeating and tone deaf"

        Shikha was especially terrible in that department. Maybe that's why they got rid of her?

        She made no attempt to hide the fact that Koch-funded open borders fanatics view immigrants as imported labor: A country that committed the original sin of slavery to forcibly bring foreign labor to America should not be going to such draconian lengths to throw voluntary foreign labor out of America.

        At least when the far left tries to guilt-trip me about slavery, it's in the context of demanding reparations which, while I oppose them, are logically related.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          My guess: Shikha was an early AI implementation to churn out weekly pieces about one topic. "Fiona" is the updated version.

        2. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

          Another rousing meeting of Libertarians For Bigoted, Authoritarian, And Cruel Immigration Policies And Practices, convened at a site visited mostly by disaffected, worthless right-wing culture war casualties and sponsored by Garish, Unconvincing Libertarian Drag Depot.

          Thank goodness these deplorable, obsolete, antisocial assholes are no problem replacement is not already solving.

          Carry on, clingers. Until . . . well, you know . . .

          1. Sandra (formerly OBL)   2 years ago

            Still capitalizing "for" and "and" in titles, huh? You really don't notice how stupid that looks?

            Is "Beauty And The Beast" among your favorite Disney movies?

          2. Kimberly   2 years ago (edited)

            Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit.. ???? AND GOOD LUCK.:)
            https://WWW.APPRICHS.com

          3. Diarrheality   2 years ago

            Masturbating to your ideological fantasies again, Reverend? Your dreams of revenge against the cool kids who teased you for being fat and slow are as empty as your rhetoric.

            1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

              Taunts from our vestigial wingnuts, deplorable casualties of the American culture war destined to be stomped into increasing irrelevance daily by their betters, are always a treat.

              1. Diarrheality   2 years ago

                You're just pissed because I'm right. Maybe someday those cans you collect will allow you to pay a prostitute enough to lie to you about the size of your dick.

                1. perlmonger   2 years ago

                  They weren't teasing him about being fat as much as being Head Boy of the fellatio team his uncle coached.

      2. Nardz   2 years ago

        https://twitter.com/VenturaReport/status/1637973466992222208?t=Xen1niSd72e02DAMymdUGA&s=19

        I've been covering the border the last couple of years and have never seen this amount of Chinese nationals crossing illegally into the US , this sector is experiencing over a 900% percent spike in Chinese nationals apprehensions compared to last year @NewsNation

        [Video]

    2. CindyF   2 years ago

      If Reason writers, who all pretend to be for the rule of law, and Constitutional rights of citizens could summon up the slightest bit of outrage for actions such as those set out in the link below, I might could actually care a small bit about the poor immigrants who can't return to this country. Tell him to go to the southern border and just walk across like the thousands of others do. A Visa card, phone, and housing, along with free health care, will be available upon his arrival.

      Until I see an article here expressing outrage, or at the minimum at least recognizing what is being done to citizens, and expressing the same outrage the writers do over illegal aliens not being able to hop on the U.S. tax-payers gravy train, or prostitutes not be allowed to unionize or get fair wages, excuse me as I say, I don't give a crap about Vong's woes.

      Writers here pretend to be appalled at treatment of murders and rapists who are not given their preferred meal three times a day, but or totally silent when it comes to political prosecutions right in our nation's Capitol. So, to you I say a big "FU"!

      https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/03/25/new-video-shows-police-officers-inciting-crowd-on-january-6th-prosecutors-desperately-try-to-hide-footage-n721425

  2. Longtobefree   2 years ago

    OK, this guy is an Australian, who was visiting the USA while working on a temporary visa, who is back in Australia.
    What's the beef?

    1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

      It’s not impacting my life, so what’s the problem!

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        Just like government censorship. Amirite? Or those political prosecutions regarding J6. Amirite?

    2. Social Justice is neither   2 years ago

      He's got a "friend" that is more invested in activism than him. If he's under the notice period then he's still employed until that term date and can return. That would be the problem as I see it.

  3. Ed Grinberg   2 years ago (edited)

    “Vague Visa Rules Leave Laid-Off Twitter Worker Unable To Return to U.S.”
    One less foreign worker — one more opportunity for American workers. Good-news story of the day! Thanks, Fiona!

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago

      Not sure what is vague about a Visa tied to work and the work ending.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Maybe "vague" now means "rules I don't like".

        1. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

          Yup.

          Duration of E3 stay: 60 days contingent on unemployment.
          Duration of AUS passport stay: 90 days contingent on the continued legitimate sovereignty of AUS.
          Duration of employment outside US as remote worker: Literally virtually unrestrained.

          Somebody’s just upset that he isn’t owed a job by Twitter in perpetuity because the US has immigration laws and he has a bad lawyerfriend.

          1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

            A sane nation would find a way to benefit from this worker's contributions and deport a bigoted, slack-jawed, superstitious clinger from West Virginia in a goofy red hat.

      2. CindyF   2 years ago

        I'm assuming it is something about prostitution and the right to work in that profession.

    2. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

      Yeah, that’s the way to run a thriving economy! Let’s create worker shortages!

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        There are no worker shortages. There are plenty of workers. But welfare state has made a large chunk of them not bothered to find work.

        Why do you constantly lie? Or are you ignorant?

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Why not both?

        2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          "Why do you constantly lie? Or are you ignorant?"

          Yes.

      2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago (edited)

        We don’t have a worker shortage. We have a what-employers-are-willing-to-pay-vs-what-employees-are-willing-(or in some cases legally obligated)-to-accept.

        1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

          I didn’t say we currently have a worker shortage. I was talking about a hypothetical economy governed by Ed’s policies.

      3. DesigNate   2 years ago

        What worker shortages? This is the best economy since Obama was in office!

  4. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

    Fiona, that's the known risk they take when they apply for the job and the visa. It would be no different if you applied for a job and visa in a different country (even Canada).

    1. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

      The big difference is that it is far more difficult to get a work visa in almost any other country in the world.

  5. DRM   2 years ago

    The legislative purpose of temporary worker programs is solely and purely to fill jobs that otherwise could not be filled.

    The recent rounds of major tech layoffs mean there are a lot less tech jobs than there were, and as a result these temporary foreign workers are not needed to fill jobs, and have to go home.

    That's not a problem with the rules being vague, that's the programs working as intended. Letting these workers stay in the US would let them compete with Americans for the reduced number of jobs.

    1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago (edited)

      As an employer, I want to hire the most qualified person for the job. That person is often hard to find, even without the extra hurdle of not being allowed to consider foreign born talent. Yes, talent.

      As a customer or investor in a business, I want the employer to hire the most qualified person for the job. And, by extension, as someone who is ensconced in the American economy I want employers to hire the most qualified person for the job.

      That this guy had an E-3 visa and survived two rounds of layoffs is evidence that he had hard-to-find skills and was a valuable worker.

      Well, what about the American whose job he is taking. I’ll just note that this guy is real, flesh and blood, he exists, while this American is hypothetical.

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        Surviving 2 rounds of layoffs does not show he has skills not available for American workers. What a dumb assertion.

        Twitter is free to open up offices in Australia if they think that leads to the best workers.

        1. defaultdotxbe   2 years ago

          Sponsoring an employee for a visa isn't an easy process, I doubt many employers would do it if American workers could readily fill the job.

          1. JesseAz   2 years ago

            Hey. More ignorant assumptions. It is so hard that there is a lottery among businesses for these visas. Lol.

          2. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

            I didn’t mention I was a software development manager and have been through the process of obtaining an H-1B visa for a hire. It’s a royal pain in the ass when all you’re trying to get done at the end of the day is get product out the door and make profits.

            1. JesseAz   2 years ago

              When you make assertions like tik tok is only cat videos so whats the danger, nobody here believes you're in tech.

          3. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

            Depends on what the savings are. I've worked for companies who had a full time person running their H1B visa program. So you pay them $x in salary, and on each foreign-born worker you save $y. If the cost of managing the H1B visa program is cheaper than the added cost of hiring domestic workers, then it's a win-win.

            And not one thing I say should be interpreted as whistling past the graveyard of our failures within the educational industrial complex which has proven itself to be utterly incapable of producing the talent these companies need. There's a market a at work here, to be sure and it's operating exactly as intended.

            1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

              Big tech companies like Twitter don’t try to shave a few bucks on hiring. They pay what it takes to get quality employees.

            2. Stuck in California   2 years ago (edited)

              So much this. Anyone who was in tech in the 90s to 2000s knows how this goes down.

              The market is operating as intended, but hardly efficiently. H1Bs got massively expanded, people lost jobs to visa holder and had to train them (I have done this, personally, and others on this forum have said so for themselves) and the tech industry, where a reasonably educated engineer could be upwardly mobile, stalled.

              In the 90s, if a tech company needed a specialty skill they helped with training. They worked with local colleges, they had programs for senior workers to go back to school, etc. It was a job perk, and kept good employees beholden to the company, which was considered a good thing before the 90s. It was also good for the companies because the cost of getting deep into some specific and arcane field of study might be quite high, but the more specialized the education the less fungible the skill is.

              The internet was built by people with biology degrees, electrical engineers, dropouts… there were very few computer science majors in the early 90s, and lots of programmers were self taught or a byproduct of some tech company investing in schools or training.

              By expanding H1Bs and other foreign worker visas they were able to import workers educated at lower cost, who were nearly indentured since their visas were tied to their jobs. After this happened companies trained less, boosted job requirements for jobs that didn’t need any genuinely special training, and basically passed all costs for training on to their workers.

              From the dotcom bust through Bush and Obama’s years, wages for most tech workers were stagnant. So all the algorithm guys, all the math gurus, the people who wanted to make money off of advanced degrees went into investing and finance. Why would they invest the opportunity cost for a master’s or PhD to work in tech when Microsoft would inflate job requirements then cry “We can’t find anyone qualified” and import someone on an H1B who would NEVER ask for a raise lest they be sent back to Bangalore? It was a bad gamble to spend US college level scratch on advanced degrees qualifying you for only specialty jobs at one or two companies.

              Government putting their thumb on the scale always does this. There are a hundred other external ill effects from the whole “Americans don’t want this job” bullshit, as well, from high tech down to fast food jobs. But the real solution is not to import endless labor when an employer doesn’t get what he wants. Or to pay people who can’t find work. Or anything at all. Just take your hands off the controls and the REAL cost of labor will emerge organically.

          4. Leizl   2 years ago

            Do you think sales is a special skill that can only come from India? Because I worked for a company that got H1B visas for sales staff. It cost 3k per employee, and the lawyer handled everything. So you are wrong that it is hard, and you are wrong that these imports are really special.

      2. Fats of Fury   2 years ago

        Fuck off. I think most people have seen how employers abuse the system. I have experience with American employees forced to train their visa replacements prior to being laid off themselves.

        1. markm23   2 years ago

          How does an employer _force_ an employee to do anything? Chaining them to their desks and beating them is highly illegal. The only reports I've seen of anyone actually being forced to work, it's low skill illegal immigrants - and even there, the coercion is less physical and more threats to turn them in to be sent back to their home country or to collect their unpaid debt from relatives.

          OTOH, if by "force" you mean "make them an offer too good to refuse", I've been subject to that. When Kimball Electronics bought the bankrupt company I had been working for, then decided to close the plant in Gaylord, MI and bring the work to their plant in Jasper, IN, they offered me a huge bonus, salary, and all expenses paid to come to Jasper for 3 months and help get production and testing running smoothly. I could have turned this down and still received several months severance pay, but I'd be earning about 3 times my usual salary. Besides, I didn't want to leave our customers in the lurch if Kimball couldn't figure it out on their own. So I worked there for 3 months, came home with 9 months pay in the bank, and almost immediately landed a new job - this was my highest-earning year ever.

          I don't feel like I was "forced".

      3. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

        That this guy had an E-3 visa and survived two rounds of layoffs is evidence that he had hard-to-find skills and was a valuable worker.

        And then economic conditions in the US changed.

        Well, what about the American whose job he is taking. I’ll just note that this guy is real, flesh and blood, he exists, while this American is hypothetical.

        And nothing is preventing Vong from applying for another job in the US and getting another temporary work visa, just like he did for his first job in the US. As part of his application, USCIS will check whether workers in his category are still in short supply.

      4. Azathoth!!   2 years ago

        As an employer, I want to hire the most qualified person for the job that will work for as little as possible. That's why I scour the internets for foreign workers who will work for far less that American workers are allowed to.

        FTFY

    2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

      Letting these workers stay in the US would let them compete with Americans for the reduced number of jobs.

      The biggest fallacy embraced by xenophobes is that the economy is a zero-sum game.

      1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

        They didn't get to be right-wing immigrant-haters with adequate education, sound judgment, and good character.

      2. JesseAz   2 years ago

        The biggest fallacy embraced by open borders morons is immigrants come at zero cost or someone can't fill the job in the states.

        Please share with us how these skills you claim dont exist here still dont exist here.

        Once you recognize that not every immigrant has a job, maybe we can have a big boy conversation. Until then you're just an idiot.

      3. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

        Good point.

        Take this story, for example. Twitter's being able to retain this guy, assuming he is the most qualified person they could find for the job (which there is evidence that he is), helps Twitter to thrive. Thriving businesses employ lots of people, including one's with skills that are not as hard to find. The employees of thriving businesses spend money, spreading their prosperity to the general population.

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

          There is zero evidence he is the most qualified for the job. He was fired.

          He had 60 days to find a new employer and transfer his visa. He did not do so.

          Twitter has laid off less than 10% of their employees. Even smaller a percentage for engineers or those with technical skills.

          Yet you keep claiming this guy as the next Albert einstein.

          1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

            He obviously didn’t attend American public schools, so it’s possible.

        2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

          They might respond with "What about Stevie over there with the same qualifications, don't Americans deserve to get the job first?"

          Interesting that people who likely oppose Affirmative Action support it when it's based upon citizenship. They probably have a whole hierarchy of religions and countries of origin.

          Same mentality, but it's somehow different because it's not based on race.

          1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

            Hiring citizens over foreigners who aren't citizens is your idea of affirmative action? God, that's a stupid fucking argument. And if preference for citizens in hiring over non-citizens ever was actually enacted the outrage and violence and resistance towards any form of immigration would crank up to such a degree that you couldn't imagine. It would achieve exactly the opposite of what you want to achieve.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              What, exactly, am I trying to achieve?

              1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                You've stated multiple times your immigration preferences. specifically making it open to just about anyone with very simple background checks. But stating that a governments first duties isn't towards it's citizens is guaranteed to increase and unite opposition. Don't try to be sly, your not very good at it. You about as subtle as a diamond back coiled and rattling.

                1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                  Your argument is the same used by proponents of protectionist tariffs. They want to protect American companies from foreign companies who do it better for less money. In this case it's actual foreigners who do it better for less money.

                  1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                    They do it for less money because H1B visas are abused by the industry. Fuck, are you really that dense. And no, it's not protectionist to state citizens have a right to be in the country, while foreigners need that permission to have that right. Fuck, you're not very bright are you?

                    As for protectionism, when it comes to immigration, it's enshrined in the Constitution. It's plainly stated that foreign citizens are not US citizens and thus their rights to enter and enjoy the benefits of citizenship is dependent upon permission from Congress.

                    Even those who argue that citizenship is a new concept are wrong. Even the Greeks and Romans differentiates, legally between citizens and non citizens. Hell, it probably predates them (in fact if you look at the language of simple tribes, their word for themselves most commonly translates to something akin 'the people'). The concept of citizenship is not new, nor widely seen as controversial until recently. And even then, your interpretation is the outlier.

                    So, unless your arguing for the disillusion of the Constitution, then you must admit that the Constitution clearly states there is an inherent difference between foreigners and citizens. And the former need approval to be here while the latter are granted that right automatically.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      I just stopped reading after the first paragraph.

                      Every other sentence is a personal insult?

                      Dude.

                      Fuck off.

                    2. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      There was only one insult, but you brought up the whole insult thing first with your implication that favoring citizens over foreigners is just as racist or bigoted as affirmative action. Unlike you, I don't try And be cute but come right out and state it.

                      Now you're doing your typical routine of losing so you imply you won't respond because I was mean to you. Grow a fucking pair and grow up. I'm so fucking tired of your unearned feeling of superiority and compete lack of intellectual honesty.

                      I'm being brutally honest while you try And be sly. And then claim you aren't such fucking bullshit. Either put on your big girl panties or fuck off and don't post bullshit.

                      I post one insult, out of a four paragraph post and you imply everything was an insult. That is fucking dishonest bullshit, far worse than me calling you not very bright. Go cry somewhere else if you cant handle some pushback when you've done nothing for the last six months but degrade any and everyone who disagrees with you.

                      Next you'll do the passive aggressive insult routine where you state what happened to you, you used to post good things, routine. Here's what happened to me, I grew tired of your blatant disingenuous debating style. So, I fucking stopped trying to play nice.

                    3. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      Fine, you baited me into one more reply. Then I'm walking away.

                      There was only one insult, but you brought up the whole insult thing first with your implication that favoring citizens over foreigners is just as racist or bigoted as affirmative action

                      I'm talking about a manner of thinking, not motive.

                      I scanned the rest of the post and it looks like it was about me as a person.

                      I'd respond if it was about the government telling employers who they may or may not hire, or who to choose in a tie. That's what it comes down to.

                      Instead you talk about me.

                      That is the most boring thing to talk about in the entire world.

                      Good night.

                    4. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      Bullshit, it didn't apply to you and you know it. Anyone who read it knows it wasn't directed only at you, or even specifically at you but your argument. I didn't talk about you, I talked about your arguments you disingenuous lying fuck. You are doing exactly what I said you would do.

                      You can't help but be a fucking liar, can you? I predicted you would try this bullshit. And here you are. What a fucking baby. And the whole you baited me into replying now good night is such a fucking bullshit, childish way to state you don't have a valid counterargument so you're going to try and be sly and attack the poster without doing so blatantly. How exactly are the next three paragraphs a personal attacks?

                      Bringing up the Constitution's views on citizenship is a personal attacks? Stating citizenship is an ancient concept is a personal attacks? Stating unless you are arguing for disillusionment of the Constitution you have to admit it clearly differentiates between citizens and non-citizens is a personal attack? You didn't fucking scan it. You picked out one sentence as an excuse to scream about personal attacks because you couldn't answer the rest. So rather than actual debate you instead imply that it is my fault for your inability to counter the points I made.

                      And I even predicted you would do that, And sure enough you did. This is why I don't even try and debate nicely with you, because of this intellectually dishonest bullshit you always pull. You don't deserve anything but insults, because this strategy of yours is insulting our intelligence. But I offered only one insult, yet you called people xenophobic. Labeled people as akin to racists etc if they don't agree with you. But you do it in such a way you can claim that's not what you did. Oh and BTW, yes it is the fucking governments job to decide who is and isn't a citizen and thus has a right to be here and employed. You don't like that, to bad, find a country that doesn't have those rules, or buy a deserted island and form your own country. There will always be citizens and non-citizens as long as there are nation-states. You can not like that, but you haven't made a good argument as to why any country should abandon it other than you don't like it.

                2. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                  That’s exactly what it is.

                  Job interview time. You see Corey sulking over there. He’s an American. He got laid off. Then you see Gupta over there, and he’s brimming with excitement at this new opportunity.

                  Corey loses.

                  The company wins, and so do the consumers of their goods and services.

                  So you decide that the employer should choose Corey instead.

                  The citizen wins, and all the consumers of the goods and services lose.

                  Concentrated benefit, dispersed cost.

                  1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                    Or Corey over there has sent out multiple job applications. Spent his hard earned money to get his resume boosted on LinkedIn, is not sulking. Is actively looking for work etc. Why should Gupta, who needs permission to be here, get priority over Corey? Also, Corey is on unemployment as a citizen while he's looking for a job. So, we all end up paying more in taxes because Gupta took the job for less money. Again a stupid argument on your part.

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      I'm not the one talking about priorities. I'm talking about individual employers and individual job applicants deciding the best fit. You're the one injecting citizenship and other things as metrics for deciding.

                    2. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      Actually you did by saying favoring citizens is protectionism. You injected the fact that you think citizenship doesn't bring any benefits. Sorry, you can't gaslight.

                    3. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      "Sorry, you can’t gaslight."

                      So instead of "Hey are we making things clear?" you go to a personal attack.

                      As if I'm intentionally trying to mislead you.

                      What the actual fuck? Don't you realize that part of a conversation is agreeing on what things mean?

                      It's not supposed to be a competition.

                      I'm signing off for the night. Conversations like these only reduce my faith in humanity.

                    4. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      There you go again. You state these things about us all the time, then cry when we state it about you. In fact, you did in the post I originally replied to, stating we as bad as those who support affirmative action, without understanding the difference between classifying people as citizens and non-citizens and classifying people by race. Further, you stated that the biggest fallacy of xenophobes (an insult) is that employment is a zerosome game, but here is the truth, even you admit to this above when you used the Gupta vs Corey example. The number of positions is limited. Therefore, if there is no shortage of domestic workers, and foreigners are still getting the jobs, then it is hurting citizens. That by it's very definition is a zerosome game. Limited resources, jobs, a surplus, applicants, it's not xenophobic to point out citizens have an inherent right to be here while non-citizens don't. Thus hiring non-citizens hurts citizens trying to get those jobs. Calling them xenophobic is launching an insult. Calling those who favor citizens protectionists is an insult. Stop trying to pretend otherwise. That's the type of bullshit I hate about your posts. Completely disingenuous and I've pointed it out to you ad nauseam and you always try And pretend you haven't heard it before.

                    5. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      As for reducing your faith in humanity, you started with the insults, by using loaded terms like xenophobic for those who disagrees with your take. Then you act surprised (which we all know you aren't) that people reacted negatively. No what actually happened here, is you can't defend your stance when actually confronted with reasoned arguments, so you pull this bullshit. And no, I didn't ask you to make it clear because it's pretty fucking clear that those who feel citizens should have more rights to a job than non-citizens are wrong in your opinion. And that you don't think citizens should have first priority. Because that's exactly what you stated. And now you're pretending you didn't and I brought up citizenship. That is the very definition of gaslighting.

                      Here is the exact quote: Interesting that people who likely oppose Affirmative Action support it when it’s based upon citizenship.

                      Thus you brought up citizenship first and then tried to imply you didn't. Second this sentence is clear that you don't feel citizens have more of a right to have employment than those who aren't citizens. So, yes trying to claim otherwise is fucking gaslighting. Keep playing the fucking martyr. It isn't your views I dislike is this type of fucking lying on your part that fucking makes me despise you anymore. It's so fucking disingenuous, martyr bullshit. It's so fucking intellectually dishonest. And it's personally insulting because you try and claim it isn't what you did when it's self evident it's exactly what you fucking did. Sorry, if you don't like me insulting you, stop insulting me with this type of dishonesty.
                      You brought up citizenship then tried to claim you didn't. You stated it's protectionists to favor citizens. You did all of this. Then you tried to imply you didn't. Tried to imply it was me, not you. And then when I correctly pointed out that is gaslighting you start playing the martyr. Do you think anyone is stupid enough to buy that? I don't think you actually do think that. So the conclusion is that you know we see through it but you don't care because you don't want to actually debate. You'd rather play the martyr.

                3. Nardz   2 years ago

                  Sarcasmic lives in Maine, right?
                  The state with the fewest per capita immigrants or "minorities" in the country.
                  Advocating more immigration, legal or illegal, is convenient for him.
                  Like most pajama class immigration activists, he doesn't have to deal with effects of the policies he'd impose on others.

            2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

              More specifically, the current immigration system is more like a protection racket, at least as far as labor goes. It is a system by which the government taxes citizens to keep out labor willing to work for lower wages than domestic workers, thereby artificially inflating domestic wages, so that domestic workers can pay more in taxes, in order to maintain the immigration controls that keep out the competitors.

              And if preference for citizens in hiring over non-citizens ever was actually enacted

              Dude, the entire immigration system represents a preference for citizens over non-citizens for hiring

          2. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

            Additionally, the abuse of H1B and similar work visas is literally legion in the documentation. Someone who is actual for work visas should fully accept that these programs are largely abused and make the argument that they need to be done away with by using a more generalized work visa not tied to an employer. You could have made this argument, but your knee jerk need to argue with those your consider your inferiors made you resort the stupidest and most counter productive argument you could. This is also why you are so disliked by so many people. You and Mike both. Instead of admitting H1B and similar programs are corrupt and open to abuse and should be done away with by offering a general work visa that allows people to apply and receive a visa for a certain time period and compete openly on the market, you decide to defend programs that are abused and creates real problems for both those on the Visas and for the citizens who compete against them. It's imbecilic and why your desired outcome will never be actually implemented (largely because it lacks any thing resembling pragmatism to accomplish buy in by citizens at large).

            The better argument isn't that foreign citizens should have the same right to employment as citizens but that foreign citizens who have valuable skills should be allowed to apply for a visa easily and be allowed to benefit the country as a whole. Work visas shouldn't be applied for by the industry but by the individual. Further they should be a stepping stone towards naturalization and citizenship. Keeping a class of workers in a perpetual state of indentured servitude is wrong morally, especially when the need seems to be growing moot, as the industry is contracting.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              tl;dr

              The current process is excessively complicated. Can we at least agree on that?

              1. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

                Can we also agree that border security and immigration enforcement is essential for making any improved process workable? It doesn't matter what our rules are if people can literally walk around them. There are advantages to working and hiring aliens "off the books" that will motivate workers to enter illegally, even with an improved process for legal foreign workers, giving legal workers unfair competition.

                1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                  How's that working out with drugs? They're produced in other countries. They get in without permission. People consume them.
                  Nobody involved is complaining!
                  What about foreign workers? Employers like them. Landlords like them. The guy selling them groceries likes them.
                  Nobody involved is complaining!

                  1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                    Except those who are out of work, have permission to be here as citizens, and are competing with them for limited work in certain industries. But fuck those citizens as long as you have cheap goods (until it hurts you that is, then I suspect you'll be screaming the loudest).

                    1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                      I don't support protectionism. Period. Doesn't matter if we're talking about tariffs to prop up industry or restrictions on immigration to prop up workers. Let the people who do it better do it better.

                    2. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      So you feel foreigners are the same as citizens? Yes or no?
                      If yes, than why even have a country or citizenship?

                    3. Nardz   2 years ago

                      "foreigners are the same as citizens?"

                      This sentiment is revealed preference that the holder would at the very least welcome centralized global government, or outright prefer it.
                      One of the central tenets of communism.

                  2. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

                    "Nobody involved is complaining!"

                    Bullshit.

                    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/28/undocumented-migrants-worker-abuse-deportation

          3. DesigNate   2 years ago

            If you’re not an anarchist or some one-world government moron, there’s going to be a nation-state.

            Nation-states are generally confined to their borders and are entrusted with power to initiate force on behalf of the citizens who live inside that geographical region.

            Expecting the nation-state to put the needs/wants of the citizen over the non-citizen is not xenophobia and, frankly, should not be controversial.

      4. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

        The biggest fallacy embraced by so-called "market libertarians" is that more of something magically doesn't lower the price as long we we keep the discussion centered on immigration.

        1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

          There’s another kind of libertarians than ones that believe in markets?

          Who made a claim about price? Why are you disputing a claim that was never made?

          1. DesigNate   2 years ago

            So unfettered immigration DOES have a downside?

    3. JeremyR   2 years ago

      No, the temporary worker program is to employ cheaper workers who are essentially bound to the company that hired them, like indentured servants (as this story illustrates)

      There are plenty of Americans who could have done this job

      1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

        Are you sure of that? Why would Twitter go through all the trouble of sponsoring someone for a visa if they could do a straightforward domestic hire?

        And why not fix the effect where H-1B visa holders gets trapped in a job by changing the rules to make their status more flexible? Then they wouldn’t be subjected to forces that incentivize then to accept lower salaries.

        1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

          If they didn’t accept lower salaries, nobody would go through the trouble of the H-1B process.

        2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

          Are you sure of that? Why would Twitter go through all the trouble of sponsoring someone for a visa if they could do a straightforward domestic hire?

          because they're bound to the company that hired them, lowering the chance of flighty workers running for the next offer and attrition.

          1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

            And you know that because you had bugs in the HR department or something.

            The hiring process is complex, with many considerations, incentives, and disincentives. You are magically focusing on this one factor as the one that is always the most important.

            1. DesigNate   2 years ago

              He knows that because that is how the H1B visa system was explicitly set up?

      2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        There are plenty of Americans who could have done this job

        Where are they? Hm? Go find them. Sounds like a business opportunity. Start a job placement agency for citizens only. Naturally born citizens to be specific. How many generations would be required?

        If there really were all these underserved Americans being undercut by dirty foreigners, someone would be making a buck off it.

        This is the same mentality of "Women only make [insert some fashionable statistic here] percent as men do for the same work!"

        Really? Ok, start a company and only hire women to do the same work for less money. The profit margin should be huge!

        But nobody does it.

        1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

          Given the number of laid off tech workers, the companies can't make the argument of shortages. If they continue to do so, something definitely stinks in the state of Denmark, especially considering how much our universities and schools have put into educating tech workers because it's the next "big" thing.

          1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

            How many of them are looking for work? What kind of work ethic to they have? Could that be why they were laid off? Could an immigrant make a better fit?

            Who are you to decide for them?

            1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

              I'm not deciding for them. The fact is that no matter what the circumstances, citizens have a right to be here, foreigners have to get permission, no matter what system you put in place. As for the rest of your diatribe who says the immigrants have the work ethics either? God, such a stupid argument. It comes down to, unless you can show that foreigners have better qualifications, citizens already have presumptions of being here but foreigners need permission. Even in a ID check system, it's still remains the same thing. The only way to avoid that is to remove any and all control, allowing everyone rather they are criminals, carry dangerous diseases etc and simply admit that citizenship means nothing anymore. Which would have far bigger implications than just for employment. As it is, the Constitution clearly differentiates between natural born citizens and those who aren't. For a starter only natural born citizens can run for President.

              1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                Um, they're all individuals.

                1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                  So, you would do nothing to stop terrorists or foreign agents from entering the US? After all their all individuals.
                  Try and not make such simplistic arguments which are so easily countered.

                  1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                    Um, I thought we were talking about workers.

                    The second sentence tells me this is some petty contest for you where you're looking for points.

                    I'm not going to play.

                    1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      The only way to avoid that is to remove any and all control, allowing everyone rather they are criminals, carry dangerous diseases etc and simply admit that citizenship means nothing anymore.
                      Did you read the whole post of just give a knee jerk response to try and imply I didn't state this in my post. You didn't state who is all individuals. For that matter you didn't even actually respond to the point of my post. You gave a bumper sticker answer that lacks any nuance or depth.

                    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                      The funnies shit about sarc today is he actually defended covid quarantine camps.

                2. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

                  ^This

            2. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

              The fact is this line of argument is just sophomoric. Considering the very story above references the fact that thousands are actively looking for work by citing the number posting such on hiring cites such as LinkedIn. Thus, the very story your replying to answers over half of your inane questions.

              1. sarcasmic   2 years ago (edited)

                Who do you think will work harder? Some disillusioned Millennial who got laid off, or someone from another country looking for a new future in the land of opportunity?

                C’mon. When I worked in restaurants I used to say anyone who says Mexicans are lazy never worked with them.

                1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                  Oh, so your argument is now our citizens are inferior to foreigners? That's the way to win hearts and minds. I've accused you before of being a corporatists as opposed to a libertarian, and once again in every single argument you've made you've proven it. Rather you like or not, the most basic function of any government is to serve and protect the interests of it's citizens and legal residents, anything that comes after that is out of generosity. If a program hurts citizens and benefits non-citizens it's a clear violation of the principles of good governance. Your entire argument is these foreigners are better than citizens. Yet you haven't proven it. You've just implied it.

                  1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

                    I was busting my ass beside those Mexicans, fuck you very much.

                    There's a bit of self selection when people risk everything to go to a completely different place. Yeah, I'd say that that weeds out dipshits like Corey.

                    1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                      Busting your ass next to those Mexicans, fuck you very much. What the fuck does that even mean? It didn't actually address anything I stated nor does it prove your point that foreigners are better than citizens or that Corey is a dipshit. If anything, continuing to call your fellow citizens dipshits show you don't value your country or citizenship. It's sounds an awful like globalists bullshit to me. I've worked with many foreign born nurses, and some were good, a lot were fucking worthless. Poorly educated, unable to adapt to new situations, lacked empathy necessary for the job. Unlike tech though, we fo actually have a shortage of nurses (I'd state for the most part the best foreign born nurses I've worked with are those from Africa and Eastern Europe, while those from eastern Asia are the worst). I've also worked with a lot of Mexican cowboys in feedlots and dairies. Some were great, but a lot were less than desirable and far inferior in animal welfare issues than American Cowboys. I have seen nothing in my professional career that has led me to believe that foreigners are superior to citizens (also, I've worked with a number of Chinese educated scientists, and as a whole their worthless except those who furthered their education in American Universities). Also, I've worked with a number of Persian born scientists, and they were no better or worse than American born. So, again I don't see any superiority in them because they're foreigners.

                    2. JesseAz   2 years ago

                      The largest percentage of Mexicans in a Maine city is 3.0% you retarded live in a lily white state racist mother fucker.

                      https://www.homesnacks.com/most-hispanic-cities-in-maine/

                  2. Nardz   2 years ago

                    "your argument is now our citizens are inferior to foreigners?"

                    This is indeed what many, most leftists/progressives, believe.
                    They hate their family/neighbors (because deep down they hate themselves), and are hyper critical of the familiar while fetishizing the foreigner (the abstract Other, which serves as a blank slate one can fill by imaging virtue).
                    The less real, or more fleeting, experience one has of the Other the more appealing the Other is.
                    Leftists/progressives hate Americans and very much do want to extinguish those who are most identifiably American.
                    They'll tell you this explicitly if you listen.

                2. Davy C   2 years ago

                  In my personal experience, some are lazy and some are hardworking and some are in between, whether you're talking about Mexicans or Americans or anyone.

              2. perlmonger   2 years ago

                Sophomoric is likely optimistic. "Freshmanic"? "Kindergarteneric?"

                1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

                  I love how above he says the clear sentence "Interesting that people who likely oppose Affirmative Action support it when it’s based upon citizenship." And then implying when I replied regarding citizenship that I brought up citizenship first, that he didn't is simply his not being clear and not Gadot gaslighting and calling it gaslighting is a personal attacks against him rather than debating. He does this every time he can't answer simple questions or you show the flaws in his argument. Every single fucking time. He finds one insult out of a four paragraph post, and says all you did was attack him. And that his calling his opponents xenophobic and hypocrites and bigots isn't an insult. Every single fucking time. Because as soon as you show the smallest flaw in his argument he retreats to playing the martyr. So he doesn't have to actually debate it. The fact is I've come to realize Sarc doesn't actually want to debate but instead wants to feel superior to everyone and sees disagreement as a personal attacks rather or not it is. He also either thinks he's smarter than everyone else (which he has failed to demonstrate) or he really doesn't understand how dishonest he appears to the majority of posters and really believes his bullshit. I'm not sure which is worse. I'm not sure if he actually believes he wasn't gaslighting or if he really doesn't realize what he did is the exact definition of gaslighting.

                  1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                    Thats why most of us just make fun of him now. He is uneducated, largely ignorant, and acts a victim once you challenge his bumper stickers.

                  2. perlmonger   2 years ago

                    That's why I muted him. I'll debate with people who disagree with me, if they're actually trying to have a real debate and not just try to make a mess. I figure I've got less than 25 years left, I don't plan to waste it with assholes who just want to babble for the sake of making noise. Sarc used to be worth talking to, and I've even on occasion seen reasonable points from him recently when my login cookie gets reset, but for the most part it's just shitposting. Not gonna read that, certainly not gonna reply to it

        2. Mike Laursen   2 years ago (edited)

          When I was a software development hiring manager we were just trying to find qualified people from anywhere we could find them. There just aren’t that many people out there who can develop software at a high level.

          And there were always many times as many native citizens as visa hires. Visas are a huge hassle.

          1. Leizl   2 years ago

            With all due respect, when exactly were you a hiring manager in tech? Because I worked extensively with a company chock full of visa workers, and it isn't hard nor is it expensive. This was between 2007 and 2014, so fairly recently. Perhaps your opinions are outdated.

  6. Jerry B.   2 years ago

    Washington Post headline for this.

    "Elon Musk moves to evict migrant workers from the U.S."

  7. Sandra (formerly OBL)   2 years ago

    "Laid-Off Twitter Worker"

    Worker. Singular. Reason's chief open borders fanatic is reduced to writing about one person's sob story.

    Hey as long as you're doing that, why not be more honest? You relentlessly push open borders for the benefit of one man, but he ain't Neuman Vong. He's Charles Koch, your silver spoon billionaire sugar daddy.

    Koch-funded libertarians don't care at all about the poor and less fortunate. They care about importing cheap labor to depress wages so Chucky's inherited fortune can grow beyond its current $65,500,000,000 value.

    #AtLeastSheDidntMentionUkraineAgain

    1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

      Koch-funded libertarians don’t care at all about the poor and less fortunate.

      Correct! Real libertarians are immigrant-hating, bigoted, superstitious, half-educated Republicans who are all about -- and generally are -- downscale losers.

      1. Sandra (formerly OBL)   2 years ago

        Poor Art. 🙁

        Constantly namedrops Harvard to make himself appear intelligent.

        Has no way to erase the record that he's responsible for the most shockingly idiotic prediction ever made on this website.

        #Ouch

        1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

          I don't remember mentioning Harvard much.

          I clearly recall being part of the mainstream that has been stomping bigoted, useless assholes like you into cultural irrelevance -- and painting you into increasingly desolate, uneducated, superstitious corners of America -- during the past half-century or so.

          Disaffected, impotent, whining, reprehensible, faux libertarian right-wingers are likely my favorite culture war casualties. At this point in the culture war's course, their main role in our society is to be mocked and scorned.

          1. Sandra (formerly OBL)   2 years ago

            I'm sorry I have to keep embarrassing you by reminding everyone of your hilariously stupid prediction. I'm sorry you didn't shove 4 RBG clones down my throat in Biden's first 6 months.

            The Biden era did, however, shove this shitty economic performance down my throat. So ....... congrats, I guess?

            And who knows? Maybe Biden will deliver that life-changing one-time $10K welfare payment you so desperately crave. 😉

            1. perlmonger   2 years ago

              Artie is just mad because even the donkeys won't fuck him any longer.

            2. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

              You keep reminding me that the enlargement of the Supreme Court has been delayed.

              I will keep reminding you that you are on the wrong side of history (with the other disaffected clingers), the losing side of the culture war (with the other superstitious bigots and half-educated slack-jaws), and the side that will spend the entirety of your deplorable lives complying with the preferences of better Americans.

              Sounds like fun!

              Now try to be nicer, lest culture war winners stop being so magnanimous toward deplorable right-wingres.

              1. NOYB2   2 years ago

                I will keep reminding you that you are on the wrong side of history

                Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot also believed that people who opposed their politics were "on the wrong side of history".

                It's what you people believe.

          2. Diarrheality   2 years ago (edited)

            You can’t hide where you’re from, Reverend.

            o·ver·com·pen·sa·tion (oh-ver-kom-puhn-sey-shuhn), n. an intensified and exaggerated striving to overcome a sense of inferiority through overt, opposite behavior.

        2. damikesc   2 years ago

          I actually took him off mute for a moment to read that prediction.

          Yikes.

          And back on mute with him...

  8. (Impeach Biden) Weigel's Cock Ring   2 years ago

    Arrest, indict, and imprison the perjurious criminal "Doctor" Anthony Fauci..
    Impeach Garland
    Impeach Mayorkas.
    And last but not least, impeach the scumbag-in-chief Joe Biden. Yep, I said it agaim!

    And I’m just going to keep on saying it over and over and over and over and over again here every single week until we the American people get what we voted for: some justice and accountability for the three plus years of absolute hell these bastards have put this country through because of their lies and crimes.

    1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      Arrest, indict, and imprison the perjurious criminal “Doctor” Anthony Fauci... Garland... Mayorkas... Joe Biden.

      Here's a related 15 second video I love.

    2. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

      Save some of that seething for Trump's perp walk.

      Make that perp walks.

      Carry on, clingers. So far as better Americans permit. Not a step beyond. You will continue to comply.

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        You mean the perp walk for the arrest that Bragg is now scurrying away from like a frightened rat?

        Yeah, your last 25,000 phony attempts to "get him" didn't work, but the 25,001 attempt is the charm.

  9. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1639585187079282688?t=R9-1ttJnQtotwj6Ihc7YUA&s=19

    Hungary’s foreign minister explains their sovereign decision to stick to culture and history.
    -> A nation has the right to decide who comes in … especially if they’re staying out of other nations business … like Hungary does.

    [Video]

  10. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/WallStreetSilv/status/1639618210575073281?t=yuV74KbthjjLgwLZCxpWIw&s=19

    FRANCE

    More customers having an aperitif in complete relaxation during the demonstrations..

    #greve28mars #Macron

    [Link]

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      Mostly peaceful sidewalk cafe.

    2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      When the people know the threat is to the regime and not the citizens. The plebs couldn't do that during the Democrat's summer 2020 riots.

    3. Super Scary   2 years ago

      That video is giving off some real "this is fine" vibes.

      1. Nardz   2 years ago

        Memes aren't subtle enough anymore

  11. JesseAz   2 years ago

    “Parents do not have a fundamental right to tell you how public school teaches their child,” New Mexico School Boards Association Trainer Andrew Sanchez said in December. “Parental rights end when you decide to send your kids to public school. What you teach this generation that will soon be voting are going to be instrumental to the future of us as a democracy and as society goes forward.”

    https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/24/new-mexico-school-boards-association-administrator-parents-have-no-rights-in-public-education/

    1. Don't look at me!   2 years ago

      The evil behind “it takes a village”.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        We will teach your kids to hate you.

        1. Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland   2 years ago

          Public schools should teach children to despise bigots, to prefer reason (the reality-based world) to superstition (silly fairy tales), and to choose science of childish dogma.

          Some parents hardest hit.

    2. Nobartium   2 years ago

      "Give us your taxes, then fuck your kids".

      1. THX1138   2 years ago

        "Give us your taxes and we will fuck your kids."

    3. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago (edited)

      “Parental rights end when you decide to send your kids to public school.”

      Crap, she said the quiet part out loud. She might as well have said, "Put all your kids in homeschool immediately."

      1. mad.casual   2 years ago

        What you teach this generation that will soon be voting are going to be instrumental to the future of us as a democracy and as society goes forward.

        Imagine if some of us knew this before we sent our kids to school.

        "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet." - James Mattis

        "Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery.” - Malcolm X

        1. Rich   2 years ago

          What you teach this generation that will soon be voting are going to be instrumental to the future of us as a democracy and as society goes forward.

          What you teach IS going to be instrumental! Sheesh, ain't knows one talks good English more?

          1. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

            Good English is white supremacy.

          2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

            1. White privilege grammar is raciss.
            2. Schools be teaching more important stuff.

          3. mad.casual   2 years ago

            The whole sentence is a clusterfuck. "Us no goes forward to future of us" and, Jesus, learn to use a comma. I was just trying to be polite and avoid having to kill anyone.

            1. Davy C   2 years ago

              If she was saying it out loud you can't blame her for the punctuation.

          4. perlmonger   2 years ago

            Not in New Mexico. I went to school here and the vast majority of my classmates couldn't write their way out of a paper bag.

    4. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      “Parental rights end when you decide to send your kids to public school"

      Wow. She actually thinks that she and her cohorts rule the school system. That rather than being hired employees they're somehow the kings and queens and own anyone that enters.

      Obviously the "servant" part of public servant is being ignored.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        No, she actually thinks she and her anointed colleagues rule society, and that public schools function primarily as indoctrination centers to keep the plebes in line.

    5. Super Scary   2 years ago

      Why is he talking about children? Doesn't he have some New Mexico school boards to train?

    6. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

      Parental rights end when you decide to send your kids to public school.

      Thank you for your candor. Now, let's have those public schools empty next school year.

    7. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

      It's happening, it's as bad as you say, and it's a good thing.

  12. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Ukraine is cracking down on a church millions of Ukrainians belong too. We should send this bastion of freedom billions more.

    https://pjmedia.com/columns/robert-spencer/2023/03/24/why-zelensky-is-cracking-down-on-the-church-n1681182

    1. soldiermedic76   2 years ago

      PJ media got it's timeline wrong. The Patriarch of Moscow has claimed Ukraine as part of his See since Medieval days, while Ukraine has claimed their own Patriarch. But otherwise, yeah, it's hard to square this with a bastion of humanism and enlightenment were told Ukraine is.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        What, Ukraine is not a woke paradise full of DEI and pride parades?

    2. JeremyR   2 years ago

      The Church in question is literally run by a Russian intelligence agent (he worked for the KGB), and uses its locations in Ukraine to spy for Russia

      They didn't crack down on the church for no reason, they cracked down because it's spying on the behalf of the country that is invading Ukraine

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Come now. Do you even narrative bro? The "correct" answer is that this Church is a bastion of religious liberty and the Ukrainian government is full of Nazis oppressing the peaceful church and people of the nation and preventing the patriotic Russians from liberating them from their misery.

      2. JesseAz   2 years ago

        I'm sure you have overwhelming citations for the church millions of Ukrainians belong to.

        1. Nardz   2 years ago

          The anglosphere IC told him so, and they totes never lie

  13. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    Do you think Fiona's people came over during the potato famine and got rejected for being too simple-minded?

    1. Kim   2 years ago

      I wonder the same thing. What is her obsession with foreigners?

  14. Nobartium   2 years ago

    This is an non-story. The guy was lucky enough to get a temporary visa, and then circumstances beyond his control made him lose it. It isn't the governments job to fix bad luck by removing barriers.

    1. Vernon Depner   2 years ago (edited)

      And taking an extended trip outside the US while he knew his employment situation was shaky was foolish. His problem of having his possessions stranded here was easily predictable.

    2. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

      He wasn’t lucky. He had hard-to-find skills, passed job interview and immigration gamuts, and survived two layoff rounds.

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        You keep making this bald assertion. Why? Twitter still has tens of thousands of employees. Apparently the skills aren't that novel.

      2. NOYB2   2 years ago

        And then conditions changed in the US and he was no longer needed.

        Temporary work visas are supposed to fill temporary needs in the US.

    3. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      No, it's the government's job to fix bad "luck" by providing infinite bailouts, at the wholesale and retail level.

  15. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    In other shocking news, this poor victim's paychecks also stopped when he got laid off. How unfair is that?

    1. A Thinking Mind   2 years ago

      Actually, it seems like he got two months' severance, so that's not even true.

  16. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

    The Remote Worker (The Neuman Vong story, as told by Fiona Harrigan, starring Tom Hanks*):

    Neuman Vong was a “highly skilled” social engineer working at Twitter on an E3 Visa who took a vacation to S. Asia. While on vacation, which he took under the assurance he would be able to work remotely, he got laid off. His lawyerfriend (played by this guy), advises him not to come back. In an unbelievable twist of events, his E3 doesn’t get honored at the US border and the inadvertent “deception” causes his passport to be denied and revoked, whereupon he’s shipped back to Australia. Upon reaching Australia and, without a passport, he’s shipped off to “Refugee Island”, en route, his plain crashes and he’s stranded on an island which isn’t deserted but Vong, despite being a highly-skilled social engineer, is too squeamish to explore to find out. Forced to survive on his own and, relying on his skills as a highly-skilled social engineer, find his own way back to civilization, he crafts a raft and sails back to AUS. His family, having established his citizenship before AUS declared him dead, welcomes his return and the AUS government declares him alive. In the closing scene, he’s seen working remotely from AUS, for another company in the US.

    * From Big, Joe vs. The Volcano, Forrest Gump, The Terminal, Castaway… take your pick.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Not believable. The typical social tech worker would not be able to keep himself alive in the wilderness without Amazon and Uber-eats, and any "raft" he built would disintegrate at the first small wave, leaving your hero for the sharks.

      1. mad.casual   2 years ago

        Not believable.
        ...
        your hero

        "As told by Fiona Harrigan". If it weren't riddled with obvious plot holes, everybody would know Fiona didn't write it.

  17. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/1639633009593794563?t=00ZeKaO_UdyHuf70RYRtSg&s=19

    The trans phenomenon is driven by Maoists, manipulated kids, and white liberal women in their 40s who were psychologically traumatized by the specter of the socially conservative dad who disowned his gay kids in the 90s. So they're overcompensating to prove they're not that way.

    Also Big Pharma, but I ran out of characters and was talking culturally.

    How many gay kids were really disowned by their gruff dads in the 80s/90s versus the perception of such created by the media psy-ops active measures on shows like Oprah, Maury, and Ellen? How much of it is a mass-media urban legend pushed on young women in daytime programming?

    1. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

      By the 80s and 90s, that was no longer the norm. Prior to the 70s, though, being kicked out of the house by "gruff dad" was the typical fate of Gay boys who were found out, or, more rarely in those days, came out. That's how the urban Gay "ghettos" in the major cities developed—Gay teens getting on the bus in search of their people after being disowned in Podunk. But most Gay young men back then kept their sexual orientation secret at least until they were grown up and out of Dad's house, and often for the rest of their lives.

      So, no, not many Gay kids were actually getting the boot from their families by the 90s.

      1. mad.casual   2 years ago

        I'd wager even in the 50s there were Sam Brintons and Jackie Coakleys. Not to say that no one nowhere was ever kicked out of the house but between lesbians being kept out of emergency rooms retconning their story and hard cases producing bad decisions, it a lot of shit to pull such a supposedly clean narrative out of.

        Growing up, one of my friend's older sisters emancipated herself. She, not uncommonly, had a thing for older "bad boys" and her parents forbade her from bringing them home. Neat little narrative about overbearing parents until you learn that she was one of four kids and, while babysitting her younger siblings, had a felon over to the house. Certainly can't say her parents were wrong. Never named any of them, never claimed piety, never badmouthed a felon that I heard of. Just didn't want strange ex-cons hanging out with their kids in their house.

        Plenty of piety elsewhere in the community. Plenty of "entry-level" parents, who kept their stash in The Bible on the shelf, "just trying to do the right thing" as well.

      2. mad.casual   2 years ago

        Worth noting that one of the strongest biological "causative" correlations with male homosexuality is birth order and, coincidentally, it's harder to play the victim card and/or develop a victim complex if you're the larger, older sibling.

    2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

      How many gay kids were really disowned by their gruff dads in the 80s/90s versus the perception of such created by the media psy-ops active measures on shows like Oprah, Maury, and Ellen?

      In Hollywood, 142%. IN real life? Who knows, but it's a much, MUCH lower #.

  18. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/ImMeme0/status/1638981836503240708?t=VW3eASmmNiEHeEQoPJpMeg&s=19

    Saudi TV mocks Biden & Harris in viral skit again.

    [Video]

    1. Nardz   2 years ago

      https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1639347634811949056?t=337pQG1eiuOvlizRA5H4WQ&s=19

      BIDEN: “I applaud China for stepping up —Excuse me, Canada.”

      [Video]

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        If Trudeau gets his druthers we'd be the same thing.

  19. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/XVanFleet/status/1639406305826799616?t=kZj9y5T8wt5zdQ4tUr0Ekw&s=19

    These brainwashed college students have demonstrated that they personify both Mao’s Red Guards & Hitler’s Brown Shirts.

    It’s high time that we abolish the indoctrination mills.

    [Link]

    1. mad.casual   2 years ago

      It’s high time that we abolish the indoctrination mills.

      "But, without State-financed Universities, where will we ever find a place to host our drag shows?" - 'Educated' 'Adults'

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        And train essential DEI operatives to do the Work.

      2. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

        At their churches?

  20. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/HarrisonHSmith/status/1639510787717775360?t=rP62oZ-QIoPgaww_ByyZnQ&s=19

    Did you know that the first doctor to advocate Transgenderism was also responsible for popularizing the modern use of the term “racism?”

    Isn’t that crazy??

    [Link]

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      Does the modern definition of "racism" include any ideas that offend progressives and any criticism of a POC?

  21. rev-arthur-l-kuckland   2 years ago

    So?

  22. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

    Trump Exploits Little-Known Legal Loophole Where You Avoid Indictment By Not Committing A Crime

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      You underestimate modern jurisprudence.

  23. sarcasmic   2 years ago

    Look at all the conservative anti-immigrant boners.

    "You're illegal now! Ha ha! Fuck you Chinaman! You don't have papers anymore!"

    1. JesseAz   2 years ago (edited)

      How do you know if everyone is on mute? Just projecting your general outrage to others? Who has the bones? Who is against all immigration here?

      You wouldn’t be lying would you?

      Is this man a saint like you proclaim others say of babbit?

    2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      "Look at all the conservative anti-immigrant boners."

      Sarcasmic sure has a lot of homoerotic fantasies, doesn't he? Reminds me of the time he shipped Sevo and Nardz.

      Also, remember folks, Sarcasmic swears he's not a leftist and he doesn't start shit here. He's only about ideas and don't you dare accuse him of trolling.

    3. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

      They truly are conservative in the traditional sense. They don't want change. Immigration represents change. It could be change for the better or it could be change for the worse. They don't want to risk it, therefore they say no to immigration. It's not about valuable skills or 'shithole countries' or illegal vs. legal. They simply don't want the social change that immigration represents. They would rather see 10 more McDonald's open up than one more ethnic food restaurant run by foreigners. Because the McDonald's represents AMERICAN culture. They would rather have 10 more rednecks who slept through highschool, with virtually no marketable skills, and living on welfare, than have one more immigrant with valuable skills and paying taxes. Because the 10 rednecks will reliably vote Republican and vote against social change. That's where we are at right now.

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago (edited)

        “Immigration represents change.”

        And yet you shit your pants over colonialism.

        Also, quit deliberately conflating legal and illegal immigration in your attacks, you deceitful ass.

      2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        They claim to like legal immigration. It's not fair that these illegals skipped the line.

        You'll get a similar argument from leftists who get mad when people avoid paying taxes.

        "It's not fair" is not a justification for bad policy.

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago

          Do you have citations?

        2. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

          They claim to like legal immigration.

          And yet look how they treat people like this who literally followed every rule. "Oh, you can't get back in to the country? Sucks to be you! Ha!"

          1. DesigNate   2 years ago

            You get a job in a foreign country, get a work visa, lose that job, let the visa expire and see if they let you back in.

            Followed every rule my ass.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

              Your timeline is incorrect.

        3. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

          "They claim to like legal immigration. It’s not fair that these illegals skipped the line."

          Because it isn't fair, retard. My brother and sister married Americans and they spent a small fortune to do it the legal way.

          “It’s not fair” is not a justification for bad policy.

          No, it's pointing out the hypocrisy of limousine liberals who want to preach the wonders of a social safety net, while hiring dirt cheap gardeners, nannies and pool boys who don't fall under it.
          Also, excluding criminals and parasites is very good policy.

    4. DesigNate   2 years ago

      Yeah, that’s not what people are saying. But way to erect a strawman to slay I guess.

  24. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/barbaricvitalsm/status/1639619592195813376?t=wNYmpmqkXSxGYi-e4tFPAA&s=19

    “The Americans of the New World weren’t immigrants, they were settlers. The settler had to conquer and claim the land. The immigrant shows up after all the dirty works been done.”

  25. Nardz   2 years ago

    Man/Woman of trans experience...
    Man/Woman with a history of gender transition...
    Feminine-of-center...
    Brotherboy trans...
    (I've only gotten through 16 of 93 options)

    https://twitter.com/justin_hart/status/1639462338603655168?t=W6hy7krhQbyizyGecn4IdQ&s=19

    San Francisco is rolling out their basic income payouts for disenfranchised people of various persuasions. On the application you can choose one of the 93 different sexualities & genders. Tell me yours!

    [Link]

  26. Nardz   2 years ago

    https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1639564433989967873?t=6VaRCyI1jTReyHhdpNLHFA&s=19

    Democrat incumbent @RepMarcyKaptur was able to win her 21st term in Congress, largely because the @usairforce released private military records of the candidate challenging her. Has she denounced this illegal activity? What specifically is the Air Force doing to prevent it again?

    [Link]

  27. JesseAz   2 years ago

    Apparently the FBI was only spying on the proud boys but also had CIs in trumps campaign teams.

    The New York Times identified the latest informant as Jen Loh, whose real name is Jennylyn Salinas, a Texas-based activist who ran Latinos for Trump but also worked with the FBI, providing information to them about her friends’ actions. Not only has she been involved with multiple defendants in the case but their lawyers as well. Did she provide legal strategy information to the DOJ that is prosecuting the defendants? If so, there couldn’t be a clearer violation of attorney-client privilege.
    .
    According to the New York Times, Hernandez “described what Ms. Loh has been doing as a ‘surreptitious invasion’ of the Proud Boys’ defense team” and demanded the government cough up any more informants hiding within the Proud Boys circle no one is yet aware of.

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/megan-fox/2023/03/25/unreal-emergency-motion-claims-fbi-didnt-disclose-informant-inside-proud-boys-defense-team-n1681378

    1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      I really don't see a lick of difference between the FBI and the Stasi anymore. Schild und Schwert der Partei indeed.

  28. CE   2 years ago

    If the rules were vague they wouldn't block anyone. Seems like they're clear.

    1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago

      They’re not. Exactly what the bar is for remaining employed could be more clear.

      The Fast Company article explains it better than the Reason blog post.

      1. JesseAz   2 years ago

        The decision to remain employed is Twitter’s, not the federal governments. What the fuck.

  29. Bubba Jones   2 years ago

    This article is about things that didn’t happen.

    About how bureaucrats might have interpreted something.

    slow news day.

  30. JesseAz   2 years ago

    The Bragg drama with Trump is starting to look like cover as the judge and special prosecutor over the classified document case has ended all privileges available to citizens and president. First they ended client privilege of Trump's lawyers and now the judge has ended executive privilege.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/03/alvin-bragg-is-trumps-legal-sideshow-the-main-ring-is-the-mar-a-lago-classified-documents-case/

    1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      "First they ended client privilege of Trump’s lawyers and now the judge has ended executive privilege."

      How the fuck does a judge have the power to end attorney-client privilege and executive privilege? These idiots are burning down the whole house to kill an imaginary spider.

      Meanwhile, Nazi dipshits like Mike and Jeff will think "This is fine".

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

        Dude, don't you even emergency?

  31. Longtobefree   2 years ago

    Just for the record; in 45 years as a programmer, I worked with hundreds of H-1B visa holders, and not a single one actually had a skill that thousands of American programmers did not have.
    Except for one skill; they worked cheaper, a lot cheaper.
    Some were very good, some were very bad, and most were average, just like the Americans they replaced.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

      And with the threat of deportation, they show up for work every day.

  32. JeremyR   2 years ago

    This is very ironic because Australia is notoriously hard to get a working visa to. Thousands of Americans would like to get a coding job there but can't.

    The US produces lots of tech people but they can't jobs in the US because of foreign workers and can't get jobs in foreign countries because they won't let them in

  33. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

    So let's review.
    This guy, Neuman Vong, followed all the rules. He wasn't an 'illegal' by any stretch of the imagination. He's not a criminal. He's not some lowlife from a 'shithole' country. He came here on a legal visa. He applied for a green card following all of the rules and waited patiently in his place in line. And then when he isn't allowed to return to this country based on vague bureaucratic rules and circumstances beyond his control, what is the reaction here? "Good! Keep him out!"

    You'd think that one thing that all sides of the immigration debate might be able to agree on would be that whatever immigration rules that do exist, they ought to be CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS. But no, even that is too much to ask. The anti-immigration crowd is totally okay with vague rules if it helps keep the immigrants out.

    So this is now the Team Red playbook - it's gone beyond simply being opposed to illegal immigration, and now is opposed to immigration generally. In fact one might argue that it has been their conscious strategy all along to USE the issue of illegal immigration as a way to push the Overton window in a more and more xenophobic direction. Once they succeeded in making illegal immigration a national priority, then it was time to push the window even further. What about refugees? What about H1B visa holders? What about seasonal workers? Time to bang the drums of xenophobia even harder, with scary stories about "communist Chinese INVADING the southern border" and "look at all the fentanyl that the Mexicans are bringing in!!!" until the national mood becomes suspicion and outright hatred of foreigners.

    I don't know how any libertarian worth his/her salt, who believes in the individual liberty and dignity of ALL of humanity, could embrace this type of garbage.

    If you want the rest of us to think that you are anything other than xenophobic bigoted pieces of trash, then you will have to treat cases like this, with a guy who literally followed every single rule to the letter and yet gets trapped in a Kafkaesque immigration bureaucracy, with something other than scorn and contempt.

    1. Mike Laursen   2 years ago (edited)

      By the way, chemjeff, I was told by several of the Mean Girls during the week that you “ran away” from the Reason commentariat in humiliation.

      Welcome back.

      (I am pretty sure I’ve seen you mention that you, like, have an actual job. And that’s why you are not always around.)

      1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

        "By the way, chemjeff, I was told by several of the Mean Girls"

        How the fuck were you "told by the Mean Girls"? You're constantly boasting how you've muted everyone you disagree with.

        You wouldn't be lying to everyone again, would you Mikey?

      2. Mike Laursen's Dad   2 years ago

        (I am pretty sure I’ve seen you mention that you, like, have an actual job. And that’s why you are not always around.)

        Imagine actually brownnosing chemjeff.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

          Hey, the kids on the short bus naturally bad together.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

            That would explain why ML is always white-knighting for his pals Jesse and Troll Mac.

            1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

              Refuting your Nazi bullshit isn't white knighting for anyone... well, maybe for humanity.

      3. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        Is that so. Huh.

        Yes I have a real job.

        Their only source of self-esteem is in reveling in the misery and humiliation of others. That is why they come here to troll. If they can't cause grief in others, they have no reason to participate here.

        It is also likely why they choose the anti-immigration position. Because it permits them to have a class of people upon which to look down (those dirty furriners!).

        1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

          That is literally true. They do it for the dopamine and serotonin. They're addicts.

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

            Speak for yourself there, dudette. You go out of your way to pick fights and then claim everyone else is a “mean girl” toward you. And it’s not an anti-immigration position they have, it’s an anti-illegal immigration position. Stop conflating the two like Fiona does daily.

            1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              Tu quoque is a discussion technique that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by attacking the opponent's own personal behavior and actions as being inconsistent with their argument, therefore accusing hypocrisy. This specious reasoning is a special type of ad hominem attack.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

              1. JesseAz   2 years ago

                Are you defending being a hypocrite again?

              2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

                But it's not tu quoque when your sociopathic behavior here is the topic.

                Besides, you literally started the tu quoque bullshit yourself:

                "sarcasmic 6 hours ago
                That is literally true. They do it for the dopamine and serotonin. They’re addicts."

                You're such an enourmous hypocrite, Sarcasmic.

            2. sarcasmic   2 years ago

              Stop conflating the two like Fiona does daily.

              Why does that government stamp of approval mean so much?

              "It's not fair! The process is so long and hard! And these assholes skipped the line! Not fair!"

              Not fair isn't a justification to keep bad policy.

              1. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

                Policy you don't like isn't justification for breaking the law.

          2. DesigNate   2 years ago

            Hahahahahaha

        2. Diarrheality   2 years ago

          Their only source of self-esteem is in reveling in the misery and humiliation of others.

          Cite?

      4. sarcasmic   2 years ago

        It's just a variation of their game where they fill what people don't say while ignoring what they do say, and anyone who calls them on their bullshit is dismissed as a liar or a white knight.

        1. JesseAz   2 years ago

          I count 5 posts above where you make claims of what others are saying. Zero cites.

          Others cite you and Jeff often woth direct posts.

          Explain.

    2. Mother's Lament   2 years ago

      "So let’s review."

      Chemjeff speak for "Lets subtly change the facts and reword opposition arguments until I'm able to craft a narrative to attack the Democrats political enemies with".

    3. Nobartium   2 years ago

      I don’t know how any libertarian worth his/her salt, who believes in the individual liberty and dignity of ALL of humanity, could embrace this type of garbage.

      That's easy, you accept that free association inevitably allows non-libertarian outcomes.

      Otherwise, free association has a maximum scale (which would fundamentally undermine that right).

    4. DesigNate   2 years ago

      So let’s ACTUALLY review:

      This guy got hired by Twitter. He applied for a green card and was patiently waiting. He got fired by Twitter. He had a set amount of time to find gainful employment. He took a trip before finding said employment and has been thus far unable to get back into the country.

      Most posts: a lot of inane back and forth with sarc and SQRLSY; a smattering of picking on Kirkland the bigot; some off topic posts; oh, and people calmly and rationally arguing with you, Mike, and sarc about the temporary work visa program and what it is used for while y’all call anyone that disagrees with you “xenophobes”, “Mean Girls”, “anti-immigration” and “Team
      Red” players.

      The majority of posts arguing with you chucklefucks lay out that they think the rules are not at all ambiguous. Namely: if you get in on a temporary work visa and that work expires, you no longer have a right to be in the country. You might disagree with that policy, but they think it’s pretty clear.

      The rest of the posts are arguing with y’all on the validity of YOUR claim that there is no one in the country who could do that job.

      It’s great you don’t believe in borders or national sovereignty, but that’s not the world we live in and calling people names because they acknowledge reality and disagree with you on how it should be handled by our corporate-government overlords is just asinine.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

        You aren't even correct on the facts of the case. The guy was laid off WHILE ON THE TRIP. He even checked with his supervisor before taking the trip to make sure it was okay for him to travel. What more was he supposed to do? Never travel for fear of being laid off while traveling? Not being clairvoyant enough to read Elon Musk's mind and determining who he's going to fire before traveling? Yes he followed all the rules here.

        Furthermore - and this is explained better in the Fast Company article - there is an apparent conflict between California law and immigration law, since California law requires companies to give 60 days' notice before a layoff. So, did Twitter break California law by laying him off during the trip? If so, did he really lose his job as far as immigration law is concerned? When exactly does that 60-day timeline start? This is part of the confusion here. Maybe you should look into this a little bit more.

        And finally, why is it that whenever there is some type of conflict between an immigrant and the government, your team almost always takes the government's side? Take for example this article:

        https://reason.com/2022/11/16/women-in-ice-detention-center-subjected-to-unnecessary-gynecological-procedures-investigation-finds/?comments=true#comments

        Here, a bunch of immigrant women were subjected to nonconsensual gynecological procedures. If this happened to citizens, you all would (rightfully) throw a fit. But just go to the comments and see the number of people minimizing or downplaying what was happening to them. "Oh it wasn't so bad!"

        And of course let's not forget DeSantis' little Martha's Vineyard stunt. Your whole team lined up in support of his little trick and virtually no one bothered to consider how the migrants were used, manipulated and taken advantage of to unwittingly serve the agenda of a scheming politician. You all complain when Team Blue politicians manipulate kids to participate in anti-gun rallies, and yet when the *exact same thing* happens to desperate refugees to serve as puppets in an anti-immigration agenda, you don't give a shit.

        This sort of thing happens over and over again, and so I have to conclude that for a lot of people on your team, they view people FIRST by nationality, and THEN as individuals (if they get that far). It isn't hyperbole to claim that for a lot of people on your team, foreigners are simply inferior to Americans. Foreigners don't deserve the same level of basic respect and dignity that Americans deserve. I hope that is not what you believe.

        1. DesigNate   2 years ago

          You read the articles? Nerd!

          But seriously, I should have made sure I had the facts of the case straight before blowing off. If he was told he could go on the trip and THEN fired, that’s a bitch ass move on Twitter’s part. Also, I didn’t mention it previously, but I don’t agree with not letting him back to settle his affairs and collect his belongings either.

          Again though, Just because you don’t agree with someone’s stance on immigration, it doesn’t mean they aren’t libertarian or they didn’t reach their conclusions from a pragmatic and rational starting point (national borders exist and the governments inside them get to control them). And it sure as fuck doesn’t make them xenophobic.

        2. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

          You aren’t even correct on the facts of the case. The guy was laid off WHILE ON THE TRIP. He even checked with his supervisor before taking the trip to make sure it was okay for him to travel.

          What is there to “fear”? He was on a temporary work visa. He had no expectation of staying in the country permanently.

          He can still re-enter as a tourist, wrap up his affairs and leave. He can even re-enter in order to apply for a new job. He is in no worse position than any other Australian job seeker.

          What more was he supposed to do? Never travel for fear of being laid off while traveling?

          Yes, I can tell you from personal experience, as a worker on a temporary visa, that's what you do. Accepting employment on a temporary work visa means that you need to plan your life around the fact that your visa is, in fact, temporary and that you an lose your ability to work in the US at any time.

    5. NOYB2   2 years ago

      If you want the rest of us to think that you are anything other than xenophobic bigoted pieces of trash, then you will have to treat cases like this, with a guy who literally followed every single rule to the letter and yet gets trapped in a Kafkaesque immigration bureaucracy, with something other than scorn and contempt.

      I was an immigrant on a temporary visa once. When it expired and I didn't have a GC, I had to leave the country. Everybody knows that ahead of time. It's what people sign up for.

      Insisting on this has nothing to do with "xenophobia" and everything to do with the rule of law and its uniform application.

      I'm not even sure how you imagine this should work. There is no legal basis for him to stay in the country. Letting him stay without changing the law by simply ignoring his visa expiration means that the law is simply not being enforced, for no obvious reason.

  34. Sheldonius Rex   2 years ago

    Give the job to an American. You are 100% lying if you say there is no American who can do the job. That is what training is for.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   2 years ago

      It's not your job to give.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   2 years ago

        Not yours either.

        1. sarcasmic   2 years ago

          The job belongs to the employer. Why do you support the government telling them who they may or may not hire?

          1. JesseAz   2 years ago

            And this guy was fired. By his employer. Once he was fired he had no work. His visa was conditioned on work. He tried to enter after that fact on a work visa.

            What don't you understand retard?

            1. MasterThief   2 years ago

              I do find it odd if he couldn't enter to manage his affairs and recover his property. I doubt customs would bar him from entry, but if he couldn't find a new job he would have to leave.
              It's kinda funny that she mentions he survived 2 rounds of layoffs but also mentions he had been laid off from the same company before.
              This is literally how this type of visa is supposed to work. He fills a need that supposedly can't be provided domestically until no longer required.

          2. Davy C   2 years ago

            Twitter can hire whoever they like, can't they? It's just a matter of whether he's allowed to *live* here if he doesn't have a job here and doesn't have a green card.

  35. Nardz   2 years ago

    And we do nothing

    https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1639722655124455425?t=9dHDdo025sr2clc8VXjhTA&s=19

    .@DavidSacks: Fauci funds gain-of-function research instead of protecting us, Nuland foments conflict with Russia instead of diplomacy, and the Federal Reserve prints money until inflation leads to an economic crisis:

    "They're literally doing the opposite of what they are supposed to be doing... It should be easy to replace them because it's so obvious they are failing, but you can't because we can't get honest media coverage of the situation."

    [Video]

  36. NOYB2   2 years ago

    Similar to the H-1B visa, another temporary visa for specialty workers, E-3 holders only have 60 days to find a new job if they're laid off. Otherwise, they have to leave the country.

    There's nothing vague about it: these are temporary visas for professions where the US has a temporary worker shortage. Once you lose your job, obviously you can't enter on them. That's why the law is written like that.

    But, hey, maybe he can seem asylum from persecution in Australia. I hear the country is almost as fascist as New York and California now. /Sarc

  37. Leizl   2 years ago

    I recently read an article very similar to this about a family being being booted out of Australia back to Italy after many years because the father was laid off. Which just goes to show the US isn't evil and work visa policies are similar everywhere.

  38. Agammamon   2 years ago

    Literally the first example is a lawyer coming up with all sorts of scenarios - none of which were tested.

    So how are the rules vague? Contrasted to 'maybe the lawyer doesn't really understand the law'?

    Just get on the plane dude, you're still employed.

    1. Agammamon   2 years ago

      JFC, its literally the only example given.

      Some immigration lawyer said its *possible* the US *might* interpret the law unfavorably - so 'don't risk it'.

      Risk what? Being denied entry and having to get back on the plane? I don't see - other than wasting the cost and time of flying in - the issue with just coming back to the US.

      And, of course, its not covered in the article.

      1. Davy C   2 years ago

        If you violate your visa you may never get one again, is the risk, I think.

      2. NOYB2   2 years ago (edited)

        If you’re denied entry once, you’re likely denied entry again.

  39. Mickey Rat   2 years ago

    I can imagine the E-3 visa law does not contemplate this situation. That a foreign worker gets laid off from a US job while working remotely overseas. It is entirely possible his lawyer did not understand what the law would do in this situation and gave him bad advice.

    1. NOYB2   2 years ago

      It happens all the time. Once you lose your job, you can't enter on the temporary work visa anymore. But you can still enter on a tourist visa. In order to enter on a tourist visa, you need to demonstrate an intent to leave the country. You cannot enter the US on a tourist visa if you give a home address in the US.

      So, what he should have done is re-establish residency in Australia as soon as he lost his job (and ideally give notice to his US landlord), and bring documentation of everything when he tries to reenter the US. That way, he can wrap up his affairs in the US on a tourist visa. He can then apply for a new job in the US from Australia.

      There is nothing mysterious about it. If you are on a temporary work visa, you need to think ahead and take these possibilities into account. Since he has family in Australia, this is pretty simple for him to do.

  40. Twiz123   2 years ago

    Our immigration system is completely broken. From the porous border that all but invites border jumpers to come here illegally while hard working, law abiding foreigners can't come here and experience the american dream due to red tape in the immigration system. Ridiculous.

  41. dwshelf   2 years ago

    So can someone explain? An Australian can travel to the US for 90 days, pleasure or business, with a mechanically granted credential (a Visa waiver, probably screened through a wanted list).

    Why not just do that?

  42. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    Except in Martha's Vineyard. Or NYC.

  43. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   2 years ago

    As long as they're not coming across in some sort of mechanical contraption, what's the issue?

  44. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 years ago

    IQ is raciss.

  45. StephanieMyers   2 years ago (edited)

    Online, Google paid $45 per hour. Nine months have passed since my close relative last had a job, but in the previous month she earned $10500 by working 8 hours a day from home. Now is the time for everyone to try this job by using this website…

    Click the link—↠ http://Www.Smartjob1.com

  46. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

    English Zionism

  47. mad.casual   2 years ago (edited)

    I’m flexible as long as it’s sufficiently ambiguous that the character is (n)either lawyer, giving paid advice, (n)or friend, necessarily giving good advice, (n)or even sober. I just chose ‘that guy’ because he’s already played the part pretty damn well and has worked with Hanks.

  48. Emma   2 years ago (edited)

    My last month check was for 11000 dollars... Everything I did was basic online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this office I found over the web and they paid me for it 95 bucks each hour... Attempt it yourself....
    🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
    HERE====)> https://www.apprichs.com

  49. angelinajolie   2 years ago (edited)

    Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,100 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,100 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
    .
    .
    Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com

  50. Nardz   2 years ago

    Hey, they're not uniformed or carrying firearms (that we know of), so their intentions must be totes pure

  51. CindyF   2 years ago

    F' off. This isn't a Wendy's!

  52. Vernon Depner   2 years ago

    But if they were carrying firearms, that would be OK, because all human beings have the same rights, and libertarians believe in the right to be armed. /Jeffy

  53. Azathoth!!   2 years ago

    Kids in Artie's W.VA home'town' still pummel it. Kicking Artie in the cloaca is pretty much all there is to do around the chemical waste dumps at night.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Mothers Are Losing Custody Over Sketchy Drug Tests

Emma Camp | From the June 2025 issue

Should the
Civilization Video Games Be Fun—or Real?

Jason Russell | From the June 2025 issue

Government Argues It's Too Much To Ask the FBI To Check the Address Before Blowing Up a Home

Billy Binion | 5.9.2025 5:01 PM

The U.K. Trade Deal Screws American Consumers

Eric Boehm | 5.9.2025 4:05 PM

A New Survey Suggests Illicit Opioid Use Is Much More Common Than the Government's Numbers Indicate

Jacob Sullum | 5.9.2025 3:50 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!