

Ask HN: Americans, how would you change the H1B visa? - NhanH

Immigrant visas, most notably the H1B, is a hotly and long debated topic on HN and elsewhere. There seems to be three camps: the employers who claim that they can&#x27;t find enough skill employees in the US, the want-to-move-to-US employers that just want to live and work in the US, and the American groups that opposes H1B either on ethical reason (indenture servant of the H1B employees), or out of job concerns for themselves (the employees are using H1B to repress wages) . Considering that all of us are probably biased to our own selfish reasons, the truth is probably somehwere in between.<p>That said, one of the things I&#x27;ve noticed about the third group is the lack of proposing of solution. Yes, the H1B is a very shitty visa, and as one of those currently on OPT with large group of friends who are also immigrants in one way or another, I can say with certainty that H1B is not a visa I want to be on. If you&#x27;re opposing the H1B visa, what do you have in mind as an alternative system? Do you prefer a more restrictive, more open process&#x2F; visa? Or for some reasons I don&#x27;t have yet an alternative that you like?<p>If at all possible, I&#x27;d like to hear a best-case &quot;if I have magic&quot; solution, and one that you think is a more realistic scenario?<p>Since this is a very emotional topic, please do read anything in this post, as well as the comments in good faith.
======
chrisbennet
Problem: Indentured servitude of H1B visa holders

Solution: Make any sort of "lock-in" illegal. No fees paid to employment
agencies, no penalties for leaving early, no posting bonds, no contractual
periods of work. Anything that keeps an H1B locked to a particular employer
should be illegal.

Problem: Getting brightest engineers without causing wage suppression

Solution: Leave the cap where it is for now and bid for H1B talent so market
forces can work. If the lowest bid is over say, $100K, maybe consider raising
the cap.

Engineers are the raw material for tech companies and naturally, they'd like
to keep their costs low. This has nothing to due with "keeping America
competitive" and everything to do with sharing less of the value created with
the engineers who created it in the first place.

------
MrTonyD
I think the emphasis should switch from employers to our citizens. In the US,
we have the ability for everybody to be employed - if we required that
everything that is sold here be made here. That would instantly improve
everyone's quality of life.

But perhaps the biggest advantage is that it would allow us to stop the hiding
of profits offshore and using derivatives - literally trillions in profits are
being extracted and hidden pre-tax.

I would argue that every country should consider their own citizens first -
and only after everyone has gotten to some reasonable standard of living
should we consider outsourcing, offshoring, and foreign workers. Ironically,
we could do much more for everybody in the world if we first fix the
corruption in our own economy.

~~~
dylanjermiah
>"In the US, we have the ability for everybody to be employed - if we required
that everything that is sold here be made here. That would instantly improve
everyone's quality of life."

No. There are already enough limitations on international trade. Trade allows
the transference of the creation of products or services to other countries
which are more efficient with their own resources. Allowing both parties to
focus on what they're good at. Benefitting both parties to the highest degree.

>"But perhaps the biggest advantage is that it would allow us to stop the
hiding of profits offshore and using derivatives - literally trillions in
profits are being extracted and hidden pre-tax."

They're not 'hidden' if you know about it. The company has a responsibility to
their shareholders to use their scarce resources in the most efficient manner,
that means moving their money to the area where the government forcibly takes
the least.

>"I would argue that every country should consider their own citizens first -
and only after everyone has gotten to some reasonable standard of living
should we consider outsourcing, offshoring, and foreign workers. Ironically,
we could do much more for everybody in the world if we first fix the
corruption in our own economy."

Please specifically define "reasonable standard of living". If a country only
used the resources which are inside its borders they would not be able to
produce a large amount of the goods and services which we currently enjoy, it
is not feasible to grow all crops, produce all goods and provide all services
within the confines of a countries border.

~~~
MrTonyD
Where do I start? Do you really believe Niall Ferguson when he says that all
trade is good trade?

But let me address the hidden money issue. I worked for one multi-billionaire
who set up offshore "parts" manufacturing to act as a middle man supplier to
offshore companies. He inflated the costs to the company so that he and the
other executives could extract billions.

At another company offshore "services" were set up to do various fake
consulting engagements. We are talking billions and billions for the
executives.

There were literally mazes of offshore companies through different countries,
with many different classes of stock - owned by various groups of executives,
bankers, and competitors (as payments for helping kill common competitors or
dropping products to create effective monopolies in market segments.)

So maybe you really believe the things you're saying...they are the standard
propaganda. But I've been working with the guys who have figured out how to
legally hide their money - so I know better.

~~~
dylanjermiah
You haven't adressed any of the points I made, please take another look at
them and address them individually. Your anecdote was hazy, unspecific and
irrelevant.

~~~
MrTonyD
This is just a comment section - not an economics class or a tutorial on
offshore stocks and derivatives and their potential applications. If you find
my comments irrelevant you should just ignore them - I'll do the same for you.

~~~
dylanjermiah
In other words, you'd rather spit out a meaningless incoherent story than
bother to address and of the points I made.

------
codeonfire
A Master's degree from an accredited US university should get an automatic
green card. We need extra enforcement so that certain academic departments at
state U's don't become diploma mills. H1B should be ended. It's purpose is
just to create an indentured class and that is un-American. All green card
grantees should have to undergo diversity training because I see a lot of
ethnic purging/discrimination by foreign managers in the US. Ethics training
and enforcement needs to be upped also to keep foreign style systemic bribery
out of the US.

------
JSeymourATL
> a more realistic scenario?

We're competing for talent in a global market place. Current US policy forces
foreign graduates of US universities to return home in most cases.

Canada however; has a smart post-graduate work permit worthy of emulation.
Seems like a good place to start H1B Visa reform. >
[http://www.canadavisa.com/post-graduation-work-permit-
progra...](http://www.canadavisa.com/post-graduation-work-permit-program.html)

------
gopi
Scrap H1B and legislate a point based system to offer work permit directly to
the employee.

------
vbierschwale
[http://keepamericaatwork.com/we-should-be-cheering-for-
india...](http://keepamericaatwork.com/we-should-be-cheering-for-india-if-
this-is-true/)

