Trump Promised More Legal High-Skilled Immigration. His Record Says Otherwise.
Trump’s actions during his first term contradict what he promised to do on the campaign trail.

During a June appearance on the Business and Technology podcast All-In, then-presidential candidate Donald J. Trump promised to give every foreign-born U.S. college graduate a green card. The talent-strapped tech sector, which has advocated for pro-immigration policies like this, lauded the move. The influence of J.D. Vance and Elon Musk on Trump, both of whom have ties to Silicon Valley, promulgated the view that he would support legal, high-skilled immigration.
If the actions of Trump's first term are indicative of anything, however, it's that an increase in legal immigration of any kind is unlikely.
Take Trump's record on the H-1B program, the largest U.S. temporary work visa program for high-skilled workers. Jorge Loweree, managing director of programs at the American Immigration Council (AIC), described the program to Reason as a "critical tool for us to attract talent from abroad" and to continue "our leadership role in the tech sector around the world." Every year, it provides 65,000 visas for "highly educated foreign professionals," with an additional 20,000 reserved for "foreign professionals who graduate with a master's degree or doctorate from a U.S. institution," according to an H-1B visa factsheet by AIC.
"During his prior term in office. His administration implemented a series of policy changes that made obtaining and maintaining [H-1B] status significantly more challenging," Loweree stated.
Trump increased regulation on the program, starting with the Buy American and Hire American Executive Order which instructed agencies to "propose new rules and issue new guidance…to protect the interests of United States workers in the administration of our immigration system."
This increased denial rates for H-1B applicants and made the process of applying costlier, according to Forbes. In FY 2015 denial rates for H-1B visas were six percent. By FY 2018 they rose to a high of 24 percent, according to AIC. Attorney fees for filing an H-1B visa increased between $2,000 and $4,500 per applicant. Wait times for spouses of H-1B applicants also increased, taking up to two years, in some instances, for them to receive their H-4 dependent, which allows them to live in the U.S.
Prior deference, which allowed current H-1B recipients to avoid going through the time-consuming interview process and paperwork to extend their H-1B visa, was also eliminated by Trump, according to Loweree. It was later reinstated by President Joe Biden.
Given Trump's record, David J. Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, tells Reason that he is "certain" that the Trump administration will "restrict H-1B visas."
H-1B workers impact the U.S. economy in many ways. Highly skilled immigrants who use the H-1B visa "directly increase the production of knowledge through patents, innovation, and entrepreneurship," according to the Cato Institute. And, because they primarily specialize in STEM fields, foreign-born workers increase productivity, employment, and wages for native-born workers.
While Trump's promise on the All-In podcast is encouraging, his record shows that it will unlikely be kept. A calculated attack on H-1B visas by a second Trump administration would hurt U.S. innovation and the native-born workers who benefit from the skills that legal immigrants bring.
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.
Please
to post comments
It was also said to be very unlikely trump would be re-elected.
Yeah, but this time around they can say that again with confidence.
"Trump Promised More Legal High-Skilled Immigration. His Record Says Otherwise."
Yeah, as opposed to Biden's/Harris' outstanding record on immigration.
“Trump Promised More Legal High-Skilled Immigration. His Record Says Otherwise.”
Sort of like how Reason promised a borderless world would be a better world? Or how your fellow media hacks promised illegal immigrants would commit less crime than citizens?
Hey media: You lost and everyone fucking hates you. Pick up my shit. Eat my shit. Then die.
Ignore what he says and look at his record, I mean ignore his record and look at what he says!
Ideas™ !
This is a fake controversy intended to distract Americans from the very real failure of the immigration bureaucracy, with catastrophic consequences. It is sleight of hand intended to divert our attention from the undeniable fact that unlimited legal immigration is good for America in almost every way – by trying to allege that there are “good” immigrants that benefit Americans and “bad” immigrants that harm Americans. They pretend that “bad” immigrants commit crimes against Americans while ignoring the fact that it is impossible for anyone using any known criteria to predict who will commit a crime – whether immigrant or native – before that crime has actually been committed. There is zero evidence that simply allowing everyone who wants to visit, live in or work in America to do so after a simple background check and health screening at the port of entry would have any negative impact on Americans in any way whatsoever, and lots of evidence that immigrants are almost all peaceable, hard-working, law-abiding contributors to American society and our economy. Of course there are - and still would be in any immigration system - a few immigrants who would commit crimes while living here; but that is already true of our current mess! There is much evidence that legalizing immigration would, in fact, LOWER the crime rate amongst immigrants - which is already significantly lower than the crime rate amongst American citizens - and no evidence that legalizing immigration would increase the crime rate here.
There is zero evidence that simply allowing everyone who wants to visit, live in or work in America to do so after a simple background check and health screening at the port of entry would have any negative impact on Americans in any way whatsoever, and lots of evidence that immigrants are almost all peaceable, hard-working, law-abiding contributors to American society and our economy.
Blasphemy. You are excommunicated from the Church of Trump.
Sorry, sarc - but I cannot be excommunicated from a church to which I have never belonged!
What is the penalty for wrongthink?
Not shocked sarc blindly agrees with an uncited bald assertions that ignores evidence he has been provided in the past.
Jeff tried to prove this once and the best he found was a 20 year old Brookings study showing that maybe in a few decades they would become net contributors.
Meanwhile let's continue to ignore all facts and evidence of this belief the last few decades.
The Inquisition has arrived.
Maybe you can back up his bald assertions for him.
You're an acolyte. Prove your stance.
He said there is zero evidence that contradicts his point.
You’re asking for proof that there is zero evidence.
That is called switching the burden of proof.
One thing you and Tony have in common: you love to fellate fallacies.
Except you know for a fact there is evidence. Sure you ignore and dismiss it. But doesn’t mean there isn’t evidence.
Yet you remain steadfast in never proving your own assertions.
And yet we have an entire program that allows day one work permits for immigrants who want to come over. I’ve given you the stats on those groups. They show a negative contribution to society, more is spent on them than they generate. A net takings from your fellow taxpayers.
Odd how you acolytes never need to prove your side while simultaneously dismissing all negative externalities of your views.
It is a religion to you.
So you’ll simply deny all evidence showing there is a harm to taxpayers. You’ll simply deny all criminal costs to citizens. You’ll simply deny all evidence. Because you’re a religious acolyte who has more in common with open borders Marxists than anything else.
Prove your assertion sarc. Jeff can’t. Despite millions of data points.
Hint:
https://www.boundless.com/blog/new-uscis-process-refugee-work-permits/
Want to see the average yearly cost for each person in the refugee programs?
I'm not defending the current immigration system that you are arguing against. Your entire post is a big strawman.
I will try again.
We have a system for immigrants who quickly come here and are given the work permits you believe will lead to zero costs.
Is this program zero cost?
A simple yes or no would suffice.
You’re the one defending zero evidence.
Why are you incapable of defending your stances?
I never said zero costs. That’s you making stuff up to argue against, as always.
You really are pathetic in that you rarely if ever argue against what people actually say. You twist what people say into something you know is not what they meant in order to get them to defend themselves from your lies. You’re a terrible excuse for a human being. I really wish you would talk like this to people in person, but you know they would put you in the hospital. You’re an internet coward.
God damn you’re retarded. What do you think this means?
would have any negative impact on Americans in any way whatsoever,
This is your fundamental problem. You have beliefs based on zero evidence. You'll attack all evidence against those beliefs. You'll never add citations as to why your beliefs are valid.
You're simply an acolyte.
You quoted the above. Now you're claiming you disagree? Lol.
What a retarded joke you are.
Do you consider your neighbors as having a negative impact on you? I’m sure many of them are a net cost on government. No, you don’t. Unless they have colored skin and sound funny. Note that I put an "and" in that sentence. I'm not accusing you of racism. I'm calling you a xenophobe.
And sarc revolves into cries of racism and xenophobia after being shown to be retarded.
My family and in laws would be shocked to hear that. I don't live in a 96% white community like you lol.
And yes, I also dislike thr domestic welfare system. But I don't think we should continue expanding it so you can virtue signal as others pay for your virtue signaling.
Unlike you, I'm a libertarian who doesn't agree with takings to provide to others. That's what charity is for. Voluntarily. I know. A principle that blows your mind.
So they have a cost, there is a negative impact, so your entire purpose here was to keep pushing bullshit instead of being principled.
How much do you donate to charity again?
The burden of proof is on you since you are making the claim that there is convincing evidence that illegal immigrants commit more violent crimes than American citizens do. And that immigrants don't contribute to American society or the economy for twenty years or more. If you have proof that legalizing immigration would have worse impact on America than the current disastrous system has had, I would certainly like to see it! But - no - you never actually provide any evidence in support of your blind xenophobia, just personal attacks and unsupported assertions that someone, sometime provided all that evidence ...
MWAocdoc 5 mins ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
The burden of proof is on you since you are making the claim that there is convincing evidence that illegal immigrants commit more violent crimes than American citizens do.
Hey. It is the same retarded bullshit Jeff and Mike try to push. As long as their crime is less than Chicago there is no downside! The victims of illegal immigrants will be glad to hear that they have zero costs from the crimes those illegal immigrants commit.
And that immigrants don’t contribute to American society or the economy for twenty years or more.
So there is no cost if they ever stop costing in 20 years? The 150B a year doesn’t exist? Or is this cost just not negative? This is getting sad man.
If you have proof that legalizing immigration would have worse impact on America than the current disastrous system has had, I would certainly like to see it!
Oh, so now if it is just a tiny better than Biden Hariss there is no negatives! Man your goal post is moving fast.
But – no – you never actually provide any evidence in support of your blind xenophobia, just personal attacks and unsupported assertions that someone, sometime provided all that evidence …
And then fill retard sarc strawman.
I’ve provided tons of evidence the last decades.
Cost per year.
Number of crimes.
Estimated welfare increased from labor shifts.
Costs to schools for ESL.
Towns bankrupted from illegal immigration.
Cost to hospitals.
Closure of multiple trauma 1 centers in southern Arizona due to uncompsensated care costs.
Estimated healthcare costs.
Lott study on Arizona prisons.
And on and on.
What you have never done is shown there is no negative effect. You live in a world of ignorance and cry racism and xenophobia to avoid intellectual arguments.
It is amazing seeing blue states cry uncle after just seeing a small percent of the costs border states have dealt with for decades.
Imagine having so little to offer you have to scream racist like a dumb piece of leftist shit. Lol.
You acolytes can never back up your virtue signaling beliefs.
You have nothing but ignorance, lies, and cries of racism. You’re as pathetic as sarc is. Good work buddy.
Keep it up ... watching you struggle to show any shred of hope for your worthless position is pretty entertaining! I'll just poke you occasionally to send you back into a frothing-at-the-mouth state of incoherency again.
Did this make sense to you? You’ve don’t literally nothing to defend your argument. Just like sarc. Lol. You’ve become a sad pathetic retard just like him.
Why can none of you idiots ever defend your stances?
My post has actual facts and evidence. Yours has nothing but cries of racism.
What a good retard you are lol.
unlimited legal immigration is good for America in almost every way
Muslims in Europe agree!
If you believe that Europe allows unlimited legal immigration for muslims I have bridge in New York for sale ... cheap!
You sound just like a socialist/communist claiming it has never been tried.
There is zero evidence that simply allowing everyone who wants to visit, live in or work in America to do so after a simple background check and health screening at the port of entry would have any negative impact on Americans in any way whatsoever, and lots of evidence that immigrants are almost all peaceable, hard-working, law-abiding contributors to American society and our economy.
Well this is bullshit dressed up in a fact consisting of a bald assertions.
. It is sleight of hand intended to divert our attention from the undeniable fact that unlimited legal immigration is good for America in almost every way – by trying to allege that there are “good” immigrants that benefit Americans and “bad” immigrants that harm Americans.
You just executed a sleight of hand.
That is NOT the debate. It's part of the debate, but it is not the primary debate, and I would merely point to the musings of former Sanctuary city-supporting residents of Chicago and New York, and in particular, a one Eric Adams.
What you describe in your comment is a fantasy 19th century America where Immigration process consists of "sign your X on the line, good luck finding work and try not to die of consumption".
We don't live in that America any more and I'm stunned that the very so-called liberals who push for unrestricted immigration pretend that we do. We live in an America where in some political districts and social constructs, any migrant that shows up to the Welfare Window must receive, by law, free healthcare, free housing, free EBT cards, food stamps and this includes dozens, if not hundreds of other taxpayer-funded services that I can't begin to tally.
If Martha's Vineyard couldn't handle fifty--five zero... 50 migrants because they 'lacked the services for them', that was the admission right there that in our Modern Times, migrants don't just show up and pay two bits for a wooden box with bed-bug-infested blankets to sleep in, they require infrastructure, funding, proper housing, healthcare facilities etc.
This is why libertarians, when in debates on immigration are shown this sky-splittingly obvious fact, they always pivot back to wishcasting by saying, "Well, what we need to then is eliminate the welfare state and stuff, man."
Good fucking luck with that, Captain Nemo.
What he describes is his intentional ignorance to support his religion.
Seriously, those links to Cato which claim that the price of labor goes up when you increase the supply literally don't say what they claim they say.
“It’s part of the debate, but it is not the primary debate”
And that’s why I never claimed that it was the whole issue. That’s why I pointed out all the other flaws in the xenophobia position. Just because Chicago has failed to cope with the immigrant problem doesn’t mean that a war on immigration will solve that problem for them … or for Martha’s Vineyard either for that matter. The solution to the immigrant problem is to legalize immigrants and let them work without having to get permission from anyone. When you can show me that the current botched war on immigration costs more than the costs of escalating said war or that either the present failed war on immigration or a heightened state of alert will cost less than simply legalizing immigrants would cost, that argument fails automatically. But you cannot show that no matter how many times you xenophobe sputter and rave.
And right back to reliance on cries of xenophobia.
Do you actually have the ability to form an intelligent argument? Are you that mentally deficient all you can do is call people xenophobia with just as little evidence, none, as you use to support you religion?
Sarc ran away. So let's play.
There is already a group of immigrants given work permits within their first 30 days. What is the yearly cost of that group? What is the 5 year cost?
We literally have a test rub of your religion. Is it zero cost?
God damn you're ignorant to the issue.
Shorter MWAocdoc:
"All good, no downsides. Trust me!"
Stop the bleeding first before starting rehab.
different Congress. jury is out.
I would like to see a tightening of H-1B visas. American citizens are having a hard time finding STEM and technical jobs. And if you are over 50, it is a very 'iffy' proposition that you'll find work in the field.
If America First means anything, it means making the system enable Americans to find good jobs, not make it more difficult.
American citizens are having a hard time finding STEM and technical jobs.
American citizens in the bottom half of graduating classes have a hard time finding a job. Mostly because too many people go to college and people - especially parents and legislators who fund colleges - get upset if we fail the percentage that need to be failed.
If America First means anything, it means making the system enable Americans to find good jobs, not make it more difficult.
Translation: Having American parents is the most important technical job qualification.
Could we please you by going to the Saudi system? Some native Saudi gets the engineering job title, some Bangladeshi, Filipino, or even American temp does the actual engineering work.
>Trump Promised More Legal High-Skilled Immigration. His Record Says Otherwise.
If only Reason had run a bunch of articles about how Trump probably won't keep his campaign promises *before* the election! Think of how many people they could have gotten to vote for Harris.
Unfortunately I'm busy working right now and this requires a minimum 1500 word thinkpiece to respond to, but do NOT take Reason's word for the shit they breeze past in their links. I went to the links to the Cato, then went to the links of the links, and those studies make no such claims about the 'price of labor increasing when you increase the supply'. I'll try to come back later and detail the receipts, with direct quotes from the linked-linked-linked-linked studies to show you that it's a bunch of tacit admissions that wages actually go down, coupled with wishcasting that they might go back up after some unspecified set of magical things happen.
Always follow the links, gents.
We give a 15% tax discount to hire a foreign stem student over a local student. This is the start of a pipeline that creates massive discrimination against better qualified local applicants in the United States.
That 15% discount should be given to all students and the tech unemployed, as part of an apprenticeship program lasting 3-years. If the local leaves the job early, the local pays back the tax discount.
By giving the 15% discount, only to foreign students, we not only foster discrimination against better or equally qualified locals, we create a trap that the tech industry and immigration lawyers are using. That trap is the OPT to H-1b to Green Card trap, which keeps an employee trapped at a company for decades.
We know tech companies favor this because of 3 prominent lawsuits.
The first one is the Silicon Valley no poaching scandal, where major tech companies colluded to keep tech workers from being able to go other competitors. So much for libertarianism, there is a telling Email from Eric Schmidt to Steve Jobs, where Eric fires a Google recruiter for successfully recruiting an Apple engineer.
#2, #3 DOJ vs Facebook 2020 and Apple 2023. In both cases the companies protected foreign workers from having to compete with better qualified local engineers (by admission of Apple's and Facebook's own actively employed HR personnel, talking to Federal Investigators). 2600+ cases of discrimination, over just a 1.5 year period alone in the Facebook case. The investigation covered only 1.5 years of hiring, but the tactics used to prevent a fair an open competition for work in the United States, have been going on since 2005 (Search "fake perm ads" on YouTube).
The 2 founders of WhatsApp, had a decade each of experience in Social Media design and programming, when they applied to Facebook and were interviewed. But Facebook did not hire them.
By protecting foreign workers, and not considering these 2 local hires, Facebook wound up paying 19 billion dollars for the company they founded, just a few years later.
What happened was that hiring managers, favoring people from their own country, and who could self indenture, were protected from having to compete with these 2 better qualified Americans, and that literally cost Facebook 19 billion dollars in investor value (a very high percentage of Facebook's valuation at the time).
There are several things we can do to fix the situation:
1 - Expand the OPT discount to all students and the unemployed, in exchange to training in an apprenticeship, whereby if the employee leaves early (or is fired because of misconduct) the employee pays back the discount. To incentivize good conduct, the employer should get reward, if the firing is because of misconduct.
2 - Allocate H-1b visas based upon salary offered, and have a market test for all H-1b jobs. Disallow acquiring employees on an H-1b visa, only to bench them and have the employee find the job or farm the employee out. That practice needs to be eliminated.
3. Have an open Green Card certification process whereby employers are required to advertise the job on all free services (Facebook refused the FREE offer of the San Francisco Chronicle to place the Green Card certification job ads on the Chronicle jobs board).
4. Require that employers take in Emailed resumes for H-1b market certification (new) and Green Card market certification. Facebook required a stamped letter, containing a local's resume to be mailed to a lawyer's office in Palo Alto.
5. If a foreign worker fails the Green Card certification, a second time, the local gets the job. No more infinite retries at market certification for indentured foreign workers. That's right, a real competition for a job.
By doing just these things, the Green Card back log would clearup in a few years, the H-1b overdemand would disappear. And we would not be issuing 100,000+ OPT visas to foreign stem students so they can force our local grads out of a chance at building their careers.
Summary: Massive socialist intervention in all aspects of hiring to protect a favored class of people.
Have you ever noticed how the socialists require a thousand words in order to fail to make a convincing argument, while it takes only a hundred words to totally destroy their position? This is most obvious in court "rulings" that struggle to justify social engineering via legislation from the bench, but reading the "Reason" comments is also a highly entertaining illustrative exercise.
So Free Labor is as much a part of Capitalism as are commodities and currencies.
OPT, H-1b, and the Green Card wait are all government programs that limit labor, make it into indentured labor.
Either all countries can agree to go back to the old method of immigration, you showed up, you got in, and you could look for work freely, or forget it.
And unfortunately we live in a world where terrorists, criminals, drug traffickers, human traffickers, gangs will all use the open border, so we are stuck, we can’t have open borders.
Capitalism ends at the border. What goes on between countries is controlled treaty.
I am calling out the kind of Socialism that makes indentured workers as wrong. The kind of Socialism that benefits only the investor class. The kind of Socialism that hides its horrors by calling everyone else Socialist.
Those kinds of Oligarchs that thrive on graft, organized crime, fear, and indentured labor created by fear or created as a service by the government.
If you call that too complex, and therefore Socialist, you are just hiding an awful set of facts that actually lead to less productivity and more monopoly, graft, corruption, and a lack of competition.
And nothing points out that kind of protectionism better than DOJ vs Facebook 2020 (where foreign workers were protected from having to openly compete for their job against better qualified locals, according Facebook’s own activey employed HR personnel).
Have you ever noticed it is you and Mike demanding the US pay welfare to the globe? It is why you avoid answering the questions as to the costs of your open border systems. You are projecting.
OPT, H-1b, and the Green Card are all government programs. Traditional immigration used to mean, from day-1, you were able to leave any employer, be unemployed for years if needed, looking for another job, you didn't have to leave.
So, I know it is complex, I can't simplify it. Unless India, China, and all the other countries agree to open borders and open investment, it is going to stay complex.
Yes, it would be great if say I could go hire a handyman from Mexico for 10$ a day, and then take all that I have earned an go buy a vacation hacienda in Mexico. But I can't own real estate in Mexico, Japan, China, India - change that first before you inject socialism as a straw man.
Just go read the H-1b or Green Card statute, all massively complex.
Both programs are a massive manipulation of the labor market.
Maybe you want open borders, well for that to happen you'll have to execute all the terrorists, gang member, drug cartels and human traffickers, that's just to conform with the U.S. Constitution, which requires that the Federal Government protect the population from foreign attack and (by the 13th amendment forbades slavery).
I am for free labor, not restricted labor. I am for an open competition for work, not a bigoted monopolizing of the job market, and that's why we have an immigration policy and a labor policy.
And you know what, it actually helps businesses to be competitive. Monopolies whether they are ethnically, geographically, or economically derived, wind up limiting competition.
Mike didn't make it to the 2nd sentence.
Keep in mind, that the massive discrimination allowed by the OPT, H-1b, and Green Card system has only encouraged Offshore Outsourcing, Benching and renting of H-1b workers by body shops, has created a pipeline of indentured workers.
Hiring managers, especially those with a affiliation or citizenship abroad, favor foreign workers and disregards U.S. law this is illegal discrimination.
Dexian a McClean VA company put up dozens of ads on Linkedin, claiming to be an EOE company, but all the job ads said OPT Visa Students only. Doing that is literally discrimination, by the very U.S. Federal Definition of job discrimination, you cannot favor a person on a Visa over a local us applicant.
At a time when there were 250,000 tech layoffs in the United States, the tech industry applied for 400,000+ H-1b visas, and 100,000 OPT visas were granted.
The OPT, H-1b, and Green Card programs are OUT OF CONTROL, and they are being used to discriminate, to the detriment of the companies where this occurs (Facebook purchase of WhatsApp).
And Offshoring wrought by easy access to visas, has cost our companies hundreds of billions of dollars in mistakes.
Crowdstrike offshored their QA to India, and the result was a 5 billion dollar mistake. No doubt, Crowdstrike just shut off the laptops the 300 QA engineers they laid off a few months earlier.
Boeing, Outsourced their MCAS software development to India. The resulting software could not detect the difference between hardware failure and actual windshear. The result more than 400 people dead, and Boeing is strictly limited in the numbers of 737's they can produce each year.
It is time we reign in our tech companies and get them to produce quality products, this requires spending money on side-by-side tests. In the case of CrowdStrike, they should have kept many of those QA people on the payroll to do a proper QA of their software.
In the case of Boeing, they should have kept their experienced engineers, for a few more years, and sought their input on design safety.
If our tech companies continue to be run by activist investors, who do not understand the dangers of outsourcing, The American brand will continue to be downgraded. This has already happened to Crowdstrike and Boeing, and you just can't get back the trust after failing so negligently.
Keep in mind, that the massive discrimination allowed by the OPT, H-1b, and Green Card system has only encouraged Offshore Outsourcing, Benching and renting of H-1b workers by body shops, has created a pipeline of indentured workers.
Speaking to this, there is plenty of evidence that many tech firms like H1B via workers because it's difficult for them to change jobs. This keeps them locked in and potentially lowers wages as their ability to job-shop is greatly diminished. Once you realize how this system works, it begins to make sense that tech companies would prefer h1B workers over their domestic counterparts.
But if we gave the OPT discount to all students and the unemployed, as part of a national apprenticeship program. And, if you left that job early say before 3 years are up you (the worker) pay back the tax break, We can break the sick cycle that results in preference for foreign workers, simply because they can self indenture.
This way we can encourage companies to offer the training that is needed for tech workers to re-platform themselves to a new system. Something they used to do, but stopped (for locals at least) when the government started offering indentured foreign workers.
I totally agree: eliminate the green card system, along with all other regulations concerning visiting, living in and working in America. Anyone who qualifies for a job should be allowed to fill that position in competition with everyone else who wants the job, and let the free market set the price.
Yes, exactly. And a big part of that is to make companies do a market test before they can apply for an H-1b visa. Right now, a company or an Outsourcing company can replace you with a person on an H-1b visa, without even asking for competitive bids from the workers being displaced.
Therefore, they are free to discriminate based upon nationality. If H-1b required a market test first, many H-1b visas (like 95% of them, would be denied since suitable, probably better qualified, talent already exists in the U.S. market place and is willing to take the job.
In the case of Facebook (from DOJ vs Facebook). Facebook recieves hundreds of resumes for every job they openly advertise. Of those hundreds, typically 30+ are fully qualified for the job, but there is only one job. So 29 locals are turned away. According Facebook's own HR most of the 29 (or so) local engineers they turn away, applied for similar work and are better qualified than foreign engineers applying for a Green Card through Facebook. Facebook HR was forbidden from forward any of the resumes of these better qualified workers to the hiring manager involved in the Green Card process. Because it would have immediately invalidated the Green Card application. This failure to forward better qualified resumes, happened 2600+ times over just the 1.5 years covered by the investigation.
Given that fact, most of the Green Card applicants would have been denied a Green Card, if Facebook was willing to do an open competition for a job. Instead Facebook protected foreign workers from local competition, and that amounts to 2600+ Federal counts of job discrimination at Facebook, for engineering positions.
But keep in mind, according to Facebook's own HR, they find around 30x more highly qualilfied local engineers than they can hire. Facebook's own HR told this to Federal Investigators. It's funny, because they say the exact opposite to the press and public. But because not telling the truth to a Federal Investigator carries a 10-year prison sentence, that indictment (at the USDOJ right now) is the only source of truth about whether or not there is a tech workers shortage. And clearly, the evidence suggests there is no such shortage, since Facebook finds 30x more highly qualified engineers than they can hire.
Facebook has never challenged the material statements of their own HR personnel to Federal Investigators. They tried to get the case thrown out on procedural ground. They lucked out in that Biden was elected.
Shocking. You never say to eliminate the welfare for these groups. So so shocking.
My step 1 is end all welfare. Then I dont care.
Your step 1 is to open the borders into a welfare state while screaming xenophobia. Lol.
Oddly your plan is literally the plan found at marxist.org to collapse western countries. Odd isn't it?
This country needs workers at a variety of levels and the immigration policy should reflect that need. Great the tech sector gets attention but who will milk the cows, wash dishes in restaurants, care for the old people in retirement homes?
So, the problem is there are 8 replacement workers in the world for every 1 us worker. An open border would start by kicking many people out of a job, the resulting homeless mob would wreak havoc. But we counter balance that with an election, and generally the elections have affirmed we need a border and immigration policy.
One that is humane, has some reasonable amount of opportunity, but that favors local workers so they don't wind up homeless.
The reason why this occurs is because our Federal Reserver does a massive market manipulation to keep up the value of the dollar relative to other currencies. So just working on minimum wage you make 10x what people make in Mexico, you make 20x what people make in India.
But it never amounts to anything, because the government taxes you 5x what people make in Mexico, and 10x what people make in India. Then you try to find housing, and that costs about 5x what it costs in Mexico and 10x what it costs in India, and so on.
So that effectively, as an American on minimum wage, you are only living better because the police are not corrupt and water is mostly potable. But it comes at a high cost, including an inability for you to compete with workers abroad.
So Trump is a liar. In other news, water is wet and the Pope is Catholic.
So, Ghatanathoah is a steaming pile of TDS-addled shit. In other news the sun comes up in the east.
FOAD, asshole.
Might it be that stricter H-1b requirements increase the proportion of the high skilled among immigrants?
Reason, “If it’s not a full out invasion; it’s just not immigration!” /s
Frankly. It should be Congresses Job to determine. Not Trumps.
Obama set that precedence with his UN-Constitutional DACA E.O.