
Trump Administration to Slash Green Cards by 50%, Affecting H1-B/EB - xbeta
http://alcorn.law/immigration/trump-to-slash-green-cards-by-half/
======
calvinbhai
This article is short on facts. As a high skilled temp immigrant in US (from
India), I follow these stories very closely and it is sad to see such scare
mongering articles based on pure imagination!

1) Diversity lottery needs to go. IMO it's purpose was to find low skilled
immigrants who'd often become taxi drivers or food cart owners. Most of these
industries that relied on DV immigrant labor have been disrupted and the new
incoming DV immigrants have fewer jobs. If not stopped, the US itself has a
brewing problem with unemployed new low skilled immigrants.

2)for people from India and China, abolishing h1b and EB green cards and
replacing it with merit based system will be a zillion times better. Current
system of giving 20,000 green cards to Indians, 20k to Chinese and 20k every
other country, is highly discriminatory and leads to many many sufferings that
Americans don't (want to) realise. Hope Trump admin abolishes h1b, L1b, EB
green cards and replaces the whole thing with a merit based immigration
system.

3) iirc Trump's rhetorics against legal immigration that his voters are
concerned about, is primarily the h2b visa, which was expanded under the Obama
administration, thus regularising the illegal immigration from Mexico into
legal one (correct me if I'm wrong here). Either his voters liked it when
there was more illegal immigration so the labor would be cheaper, or just that
right now there's a lot of competition they face for their jobs and want to
reduce h2 b visas.

US economy is changing a lot in terms of automation, AI, and machine learning,
thus reducing the need for a lot of cheap immigrant labor, while increasing
the need for high skilled labor to stay competitive with Tech giants from
China. Which means, the US immigration policy needs to adapt to it ASAP.

I wish politico and alcorn.law dug into these points instead of writing click
baity articles to score points against Trump.

~~~
dazilcher
I must call BS on your first point: it's not just false, but also quite naive
to think that an immigration program would purposely target low-skilled
individuals.

First, DV is supposed to use random selection (lottery) - so the resulting
distribution should reflect the statistical makeup of the applicant pool.

Second, one of the DV requirements is a high school diploma - so the pool is
biased towards higher education from the start.

Third, the rest of the process (documentation, online application,
English/affidavit/liquidity requirements) again favors educated/affluent
individuals.

So I posit that the opposite is true: DV is selecting from a highly-skilled
applicant pool, and the benefitting immigrants are better educated than the
average population.

Anecdotal evidence: all DV immigrants I know (including myself) hold at least
a bachelor degree, and work in high-skill professional fields.

~~~
calvinbhai
My apologies if my point came across as condescending. That wasn't my
intention.

High school diploma is not exactly high skilled. But I agree with the rest of
what you say, that there are a good number of immigrants on DV who are high
skilled, including you.

But the problem of basic skilled immigrants getting DV lottery over highly
skilled immigrants from certain countries getting shafted still remains as is.
Most taxi drivers I have spoken to in north east either come through DV or
family based legal immigration path.

With a merit based immigration system, you and I can immigrate to US with way
fewer hassles and uncertainties while less skilled people will need to skill
up to be eligible.

~~~
dazilcher
DV, as its name suggests, is an immigration program, not an employment
program. I happen to believe it tends to filter applicants educated above the
local population average, but that is not its primary purpose.

And that's a good thing - prioritizing immigration based on the hot job du
jour seems quite dangerous and guaranteed to produce the opposite of
"diverse".

~~~
calvinbhai
I believe, the Immigration program intends to make up for the lower TFR in US,
so that there is a consistent rate of increase in the population.

Until now, immigrants who were not highly skilled (with graduate degrees) were
needed to fill the space, but increasing levels of automation and AI, its
dangerous for US to not tweak its immigration program to factor this in. If
immigrants coming to US have no job prospects, it can only lead to more abuse
of immigrants and / or rise in crime.

Immigration need not be prioritized based on the "hot job market", but needs
to be prioritized based on those who can remain employed with increasing
levels of automation and AI.

------
whack
To be honest, the current system is so dysfunctional that this may even be an
improvement. It is shocking to me that only 10% of our immigrants have gotten
here though merit. There was an article on nytimes recently about the Canadian
immigration system, how successful and popular it's been, and how this is
largely the result of a system that heavily priorities immigrants who are
highly skilled and can contribute the most to the economy.

I distrust Trump just as much as any other liberal, but even a broken clock
can sometimes be right. Any moves we make towards a Canadian model of
immigration, would be a great improvement over the status quo.

[https://nyti.ms/2ugNBLH](https://nyti.ms/2ugNBLH)

 _" Those admitted to the U.S. on the basis of merit have accounted for less
than 10 percent of all legal immigrants over the past 15 years_"

 _" The legislation would, for example, increase the number of green cards —
which allow for permanent residency in the U.S. — that are granted on the
basis of merit to foreigners in a series of categories including outstanding
professors and researchers, those holding advanced degrees, and those with
extraordinary ability in a particular field."_

~~~
whatupmd
"those holding advanced degrees, and those with extraordinary ability in a
particular field."

Would be interested to see a break-down of degree and field. I will posit that
majority of H-1Bs are Masters holders in IT field from the same country.

~~~
scarface74
What percentage of immigrants holding "advanced degrees" from foreign
countries are actually any good? My experience from interviewing "senior
software engineers" that were educated both domestically and abroad shows an
appalling percentage of people who can actually code let alone architect a
decent system.

If people in the industry can't distinguish between qualified and non
qualified people, how can the government?

------
letitgo12345
Misleading title. Bill has nothing (so far has been reported) on H1-Bs and if
anything, EB based GCs seem to be getting a boost. What's been cut in the
_proposed_ bill is family based immigration. And anyway, this is very very
very far from becoming law.

------
KevinEldon
This article is an interpretation of original reporting done by Politico [1].
From the original article.

"legislation would also mark a broader shift away from the current immigration
system, which favors those with family currently in the U.S., toward a merit-
based approach."

"Those admitted to the U.S. on the basis of merit have accounted for less than
10 percent of all legal immigrants over the past 15 years"

"Trump praised the virtues of the merit-based models of Canada and Australia"

1: [http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/12/trump-legal-
immigra...](http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/12/trump-legal-immigration-
cuts-240478)

------
godzillabrennus
This will send shockwaves through corporate America.

I was at a Capitol One office last summer talking to their engineers. It was
over 90% H1-B visa holders.

Either they have to open foreign offices in other countries for talent or hire
American citizens.

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

~~~
mc32
We need to take a page out of the old Russian system. Get the younger
generation prepared for a STEM field to excel. The USSR did a lot of things in
hamfisted ways, but one thing they did right was strengthening their STEM
education and cranking out very good scientists and mathematicians. We can do
that too, if we put the effort into it.

Instead we crank out liberal arts kids and other low value add degrees --I
mean, nice to have well rounded education, but don't add to the economy as
much as they could in other fields.

China isn't getting to where they are by having a bunch of kids graduating
with humanities degrees, that's for sure.

~~~
closeparen
What are you talking about? There are far too many STEM graduates already.
Brilliant people with PhDs from great schools often can't find living-wage
work in their fields.

Becoming highly educated in STEM isn't just low-value-add, it destroys value:
a smart person wastes years of his life and productive capacity training for a
research position he'll never get, then (optimistically) gets a programming or
finance job which barely (if at all) leverages a few of his undergrad classes.

The economy, and basic human compassion, require that we stop wasting these
people's youth and loading them up with debt. We need drastic cuts to STEM
programs until we're producing graduates at somewhere near the rate at which
we're hiring them.

That, or a massive investment in private sector R&D and public grant writing
such that the output of the existing STEM education machine can find decent,
relevant work.

~~~
mc32
Either companies i know don't know how to find the surplus of domestic stem
students and thus hire from abroad (and actively complain about the changes),
or maybe we just don't pay enough to syphon people away from the high paying
liberal arts professions.

Who knows, maybe the administration is right, we have a glut and need to
restrict outside pressure in those fields.

~~~
closeparen
Companies for the most part don't hire scientists and mathematicians. Quant
finance may use advanced science and math degrees as a signal to find
exceptionally smart and capable people, but the physics majors at hedge funds
aren't doing physics. What little work there is for math & science is in
government-funded academic research.

Engineers (real ones, not programmers) have a reliable path to middle-class
life, I suppose, but this is mostly due to their scarcity. There's enough
demand for new bridges, cars, and airplanes to sustain the profession, but not
a ravenous expansion.

That leaves technology. Where is technology education? There are some trade
schools that will teach you to administer and support Microsoft and Cisco
business-oriented products for a decent lower-midde-class life, though they
are slowly being eaten by The Cloud. And then there's Computer Science, which
is a precursor to working as a programmer only because we lack more direct
pedagogical methods.

------
eksemplar
I wonder why these changes are so welcomed by low-middle skill labour. Do they
simply not see the big picture of what brain drain does to the total sum of
opportunities?

~~~
jbhatab
are you actually serious? the lower middle class support Trump because of his
job focused agenda. the man says the word job more than anything.

to correlate everything a president does with support of his general fan base
is ridiculous. that's like saying democrats support murdering people with
drones because Obama used that often. This type of logic is very divisive and
dangerous.

~~~
averagewall
They kind of do, don't they? The reason Obama was able to kill so many people
with drones was because he was elected. His voters could have decided killing
was wrong and not voted for him. He even warned people he would do drone
killing while he was campaigning.

Perhaps you're saying most Obama voters didn't like the drone killing but
tolerated it because they liked the rest of Obama enough? That at least means
they don't mind killing too much - it's not a show stopper for them.

~~~
Broken_Hippo
Voting for a candidate doesn't mean you agree with all their policies, simply
that you agree more _or_ find the bad ones less vile than the competition.
This is especially true in what is essentially a two-party system.

For example, one candidate is racist and thinks segregation and separate-but-
equal is the way to go towards a peaceful society. The other one supports
drone strikes (or something else you find vile). Any other candidates have one
similarly vile views.

Abstaining from voting to protest these views doesn't seem to be the answer
for most folks, so they look at other things and pick the one they like the
most. Afterwards, you can voice your concern over the things you disagree with
or choose to ignore them.

This isn't dissimilar to not needing to agree with everything your friends,
partner, or family says to spend time with them.

~~~
averagewall
That's the ridiculous thing about American voting. They don't pick the one
they like the most, they do what your first paragraph said and pick the one
they dislike the least out of the two major parties. The result is the same
two parties doing the same things year after year, swapping places about every
8 years and making the whole exercise of voting pointless except to maintain
that stable state.

So many people on HN seem to support strong climate change action, dislike
drone strikes, and want massive immigration reform. But hardly anyone voted
for the Green party.

~~~
Broken_Hippo
It is ridiculous, but I also think folks tend to not like either viable
choice, and often don't see themselves represented in the fringe parties - if
they even have many choices in the category. I'm from Indiana, and often the
only third choice was the green party. And that was only for presidental
election, nothing for other offices.

The system in the states is a multi-party system in name only: Functionally,
it is a two-party system, hence the low participation in such political
parties. I think this could be changed with proper legislation, but am
doubtful this will happen in the current political climate.

Besides, it isn't like the green party could make everyone happy either, and
doubt they'd have an easier time getting things done in congress.

------
jurassic
I'm the only person on my team with American citizenship, but my teammates are
all so talented. And nice. It makes me sad to think about the stress and
insecurity these changes could cause them.

~~~
calvinbhai
I wonder if current immigration rules don't cause any stress to your team
members. Just because they don't talk about it, doesn't mean they are not
stressing about it.

If any of them are from India/China and they understand what's really
happening with the immigration policies in the US, they'll probably love these
upcoming changes (related to merit based immigration)

~~~
tempForaReply13
oh man... I'm sitting here wondering if I'm even going to have a job next week
because of these kinds of changes. It's been like this all year. I've been
looking for a job in my country for months, and have only had one interview.

If I was a stress drinker, I'd be going through a couple bottles of wine a day
at this point.

------
benevol
I had acquired a green card a few years ago, then it got revoked b/c I hadn't
settled quickly enough in the US; I'm sure my subconscious was somehow at play
at that time. Today, I certainly wouldn't make any effort to acquire a green
card again.

Of course this is anecdotal. But what's not anecdotal is the fact that this
country has been going south for quite some time now (even if living in the
US, you may not realize it), which is why this destructive movement will prove
hard to stop.

------
hourislate
Thank goodness.

The Indian H1B folks have over run DFW. I was just told today that one of the
H1B folks is going full time and the company is doing the paper work to make
it happen (Green Card). It's a shame because they could have certainly hired a
local person or a kid out of school but I suppose they can pay this person a
pittance in comparison.

H1B program needs to to be done away with. It is being gamed and no longer
serves its real purpose.

~~~
arcticbull
It's clear you've never been on the employer side of an H1 petition let alone
a green card, or spoken to an immigrant before.

H1s cost $6000+ and are available 4 days out of the year in April, and even
then you have a 33% chance of getting one. And should you get one you can't
start until the new USCIS fiscal year in October.

What about that makes you think they'd rather hire a foreigner? The green card
burden is years and many more thousands of dollars. Those people are probably
just really good.

Also, your statement about H1s getting paid way less isn't usually true,
they're required to be paid the prevailing wage for the job they're doing in
their geographical area.

Now if you're talking about body shops, well that's a totally different
conversation and needs to end but if those people were sponsored directly by
your employer there's some good reasons. And if your employer is using a body
shop you should be mad at them not USCIS -- for this, there's plenty of other
reasons to be mad at USCIS haha.

~~~
learc83
>Also, your statement about H1s getting paid way less isn't usually true,
they're required to be paid the prevailing wage for the job they're doing in
their geographical area.

That's easy to game and not enforced very well.

>there's some good reasons

Often that good reason is that if they're fired and can't very quickly find
another employer, they'll have to leave the country. And if the company is
sponsoring a green card, depending on where they are in the process if they
change employers, they'll be moved back in priority.

Employing a workforce full of H-1B visa holders means you have a workforce
with drastically reduced mobility. That alone is worth the price for many
employers. Add to that the fact that it's relatively easy to get away with
something like hiring someone for QA and making them do development work (to
bypass prevailing wage requirements) and H-1Bs are a lot more attractive than
you seem to think.

~~~
calvinbhai
I agree on many of the points you made. This is the reason h1b needs to be
abolished and replaced with a high skilled immigration system like Canada's.
it'll give true mobility for the immigrant and less power to the company to
abuse, which would in turn lead to less or no wage disparity among immigrants
and citizens of US.

------
rb666
Just move to Europe, you'll be happier for it.

~~~
olegkikin
EU programmer salaries are way too low. In the US a senior web dev can make
$200-300K. Good luck finding anything even close to that in the EU. Maybe if
you're extraordinary, but then you can make a lot more in the US.

~~~
prodmerc
Living costs are proportionately lower as well, even within the US (and many
have chimed in saying most US devs don't make anywhere near SV salaries).

~~~
olegkikin
> _Living costs are proportionately lower as well_

You have to be more specific. EU has a huge range in cost of living.
Switzerland/Norway are very expensive. Poland/Romania are cheap.

Plus, as an American, you will get double-taxed in some of the countries that
don't have an agreement with the US.

Having living in both the US and the EU, USA is still cheaper, as in, you end
up with a lot more money after all your expenses, even if you account the
health insurance costs (which the difference with the EU taxes alone will
offset).

------
brooklyntribe
Republicans are "afraid" of unknowns. People, places things. It seems to be
wired in. They are not really racists, just they are "afraid." Probably goes
back to ancient days. Who is that stranger? Do they carry a disease, will they
take my wife, etc. Why take a chance?

While Democrats seem to welcome the unknown. Take that chance. Lets just take
a leap. WTF, life is to experience it all. And then we die.

Seems that we are really not ready to live in urban areas yet, with all these
foreign "tribes", amazed we all do.

Conservative friends: OMG that food is so spicy, how can you eat it?

Liberal friends: Give me more spice! Pile it on!

I'm an old WASP, pile on the spice, drop me off where I don't speak the
language, can't figure out the food, toilet paper? What's that? Life is so
short, I'm ready to just take any chance.

Mars? Sign me up, one way is better.

:-)

~~~
anotherbrownguy
Doesn't explain why Republicans freed the slaves and Democrats fought for 60
years to bring it back... but whatever floats your boat.

I wish you best of luck to your trip to Mars. Hope it is one way.

~~~
BoiledCabbage
Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with him, it's pretty clear he's
talking about the modern republican party. Ie the coalition that was formed as
a backlash to the civil rights act.

If you disagree with him (and there are legit reasons to), then write your
views opposed to him, don't try to misrepresent his view and argue against
that instead.

~~~
anotherbrownguy
The "backlash" was from former Democrats who were brainwashed for decades to
hate the blacks who then decided to support the Republican party as a revenge
because they felt betrayed by the Democratic Party when they switched their
position on black people... not very different from some former Bernie
supporters voting Trump.

If Republicans as a whole are now "afraid of blacks" because a small southern
group joined it as a revenge then would you also say that now they are also
afraid of capitalism because some Bernie supporters joined it?

------
fazkan
and then the rise of the remote empires began.

I am sure most companies will find a way to hire talent remotely. The positive
side of this act would be that huge companies will start to think about hiring
people remotely. Which would mean improved practices in managing remote
talent.

and frankly I think its overdue, the tools are the technology is there, why
the do you need borders to impede your company's progress.

~~~
hiram112
We've been hearing this warning forever.

The truth is, if the remote teams in low cost places like India and China
worked so well, they would have long ago offshored everything.

Cause let's be honest, most companies can't even deal with remote working once
or twice a week from their own employees in the same city.

~~~
fazkan
Well, I think, the difference now is that the technology is mature enough to
enable distributed work. I work at Mentor Graphics, and altough its embedded
software most of my managers work from EU/US timezone and they all work from
home.

I don't know how people used to manage their issues before jira/github but it
certainly has helped remote work. Plus the internet as a whole is penetrating
developing countries so the issues of no internet and lag is not there
anymore.

I can't back this up with data but, I have personally seen a rise in the
remote first companies. the first name that comes to mind is Linaro, plus I
think red hat also supports remote hires. All the dev ops jobs that I see are
remote.

So yes the change is a difficult one and it needs a particular mindset on the
managers side as well. But I think the threshold to become a remote company is
a lot lower now...

------
jgalt212
Probably not the right way to go about this, but should help push up median
wages. So for that reason, probably not a bad thing.

