Slashdot Mirror
Annual H-1B Visa Cap Met In One Day
CNet is reporting that the door has closed on the H1-B visa application process for this year, one day after it began. The US Citizenship and Immigration Services said that it had received 150,000 applications as of yesterday afternoon. 65,000 H1-B visas can be issued for foreigners with bachelor's degrees. The USCIS will choose randomly from the applications to determine the winners.
Kdawson, please suck my balls. Hard. Really hard. You make this site suck even more than it normally would. It's half as bad as digg at this point. You actually submitted a headline where the moron spelled it batchelor
My company has a fairly large presence in India. Recently, one of our India employees came to the US for a few weeks to work with us. He mentioned that working in India, he could expect to work for 10 years before he could afford to buy a house. However, if he were to work in the US, he could afford a home in India after only 2 years of work. If I were an Indian, I would want to work in the US too.
Add to this the fact that there's really no effective enforcement going on, this "limit filled in one day" just reeks of political fodder to push for more Visas.
Surprisingly, there are indeed some actual real numbers published on the number of H1-B admissions into the U.S., from the Department of Homeland Security. These numbers appear to confirm that there are a lot more H1-B's entering the country than the Visa limit would suggest.
The DHS document (The 2005 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics) is at: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/year book/2005/OIS_2005_Yearbook.pdf
I'm quoting the following from a discussion on dice.com at: http://seeker.dice.com/olc/thread.jspa?threadID=49 2&tstart=15
"Temporary workers and Trainees:" Specialty Occupations(H-1B):
YEAR - H-1B visas Admitted
1996 - 144,458
1997 - 240,947
1998 - 302,421
1999 - 355,065
2001 - 384,191
2002 - 370,490
2003 - 360,498
2004 - 386,821
There are a number of other excellent quotes on the above thread on Dice. It's well worth reading.
The best way to predict the future is to create it. - Peter Drucker.
As an H1B holding Indian working in the US, I can tell you for a fact that the assertion you make (really your lawyer) is completely and utterly false. The cap applies to the entire world. There are other visa types that you can come to the US under, but if its the H1B you are interested in, the cap applies.
If your lawyer doesn't know this or is feeding you misinformation for whatever reason, you should look into taking your business elsewhere.
I know for a fact that the cap _does_ apply to Indians and Chinese. Your lawyer is either incompetent or he is misleading you for whatever reason.
Scotland - we're possibly the most welcoming country in the world. There's a hell of a lot less racism here than in England (as far as you can tell by the news anyway) and there's a lot of open space for people to enjoy if they're looking for that sort of thing.
Wrong. The US Supreme Court made a decision that anyone's property can be condemned and be made part of a private business at anytime.
L ondon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_
This case shows that a county can take property from one landowner and give/sell to another landowner at will. You live in the property you "own" only at the whim of the county and state.
Unfortunately, you remember wrong. The Economic Policy Institute has a great article on this that should probably be submitted to the main page. You can find the article here: http://www.sharedprosperity.org/bp187.html
To quote the linked article:
The most significant design flaw is the absence of a labor market test. The U.S. Department of Labor recently expressed the practical implications of this fact in a straightforward manner when it stated that "H-1B workers may be hired even when a qualified U.S. worker wants the job, and a U.S. worker can be displaced from the job in favor of the foreign worker." Simply put, an employer does not have to test the labor market before hiring a foreign worker on an H-1B.
That's called eminent domain.
OK, you need to explain your concept of "tax cost". Are you saying that the taxes that both I and my employer pay are "losses" that must be "made up" in order to be fair? If that were the case, it would seem that you're putting that in the same light as, for example, education loans or mortgages. If you're meaning something different, I think the community might benefit from a citation or two fleshing out your point of view. (I think I've been reading too much Wikipedia discussion.) Personally, I look at my taxes as paying for services that benefit society (as inefficient and wasteful as they may be sometimes.) I personally like having an FBI, an FDA, a national military, and so forth.
Your figure of 65% seems suspect to me. A quick glance at my last pay stub says that even when you consider both my and my employer's contribution to Social Security, the deductions (state and federal taxes, social security, and Medicare) are less than 30% of my income. Where does the other 35% come from? Even figuring in property taxes (in my case, less than 5% of my income alone, and we're a dual-income household) your number seems high.
IMHO the reasons that H1-B workers are so popular with US employers are more complicated than simply the financial considerations. Outside of the tax advantages (whatever they might be), it's easier to exploit H1-B workers. Specifically, you can pay them less and make them do more work than their native American counterparts, because they have the threat of deportation if they quit for being treated unfairly. Companies will always treat an employee as badly as they can get away with in terms of salary, benefits, and corporate culture, and H1-B visa holders are at a disadvantage. I know that the rules say they're required to pay an H1-B visa holder the same as they pay a US citizen, but honestly, how well is that enforced (or, more to the point, how enforceable is it?) An H1-B worker who finds out his/her US citizen co-workers are getting paid significantly more than he/she is has little recourse. Sure, they can file a complaint with the appropriate agency, but that's a sure way to find yourself laid off and on a plane back to your native country before you can follow up.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
FUD? Do you even know what FUD is? No, I am no spreading "FUD", but some may say I spread lies about Europe. I do not. I was born and raised in Norway. I have worked in several European countries, and I have been gainfully employed in the US for a good few years now. As opposed to most Europeans (and Americans for that matter), I have experience enough to know what I am talking about.
It doesn't? Please educate me. How can it be that when a major news organization followed two groups of Somali immigrants, one settled in Europe (Germany) and one in Phoenix AZ, after one year out of Somalia, every family in the Phoenix group had at least one full-time employed member, while the group in Germany had zero employed people, full or part time. Did the US get all the "good" Somalis and Germany all the lazy shits? Unlikely. The Germans got the same Somalis, but they hadn't been able to get them work permits yet, in fact 6 months later (18 months after landing in Germany), most of them still were not allowed to work. At that stage they were all happy enough on the dole, and well on their way to doing what so many immigrants do in Europe, generate generation upon generation of unemployed children.
Why do people find work in the US? Well, because when you immigrate to the US, you work or you starve. Simple enough. You no work - you no eat.
Who cares? You don't speak the language -> you don't work. You don't work -> you and your kids starve. Simple. They'll learn. Don't put them om welfare. Remember: "Nød lærer nøgen kvinde at spinde". Wise words. In an effort to be "nice" to the immigrants, those words are forgotten and the "nice" becomes a behavior that hurts both the immigrant and the host country.
Welfare for people who get into trouble in their life is good. Once they have earned it. Stepping onto Danish ground doesn't make you deserve it. The fact that the European governments not only allow, but actively encourages their immigrant population to stay on the dole is the reason Europe has an immigration problem. Well, a major reason. The second reason is that Europe in general has a no immigration policy. Europe doesn't accept any immigrants in fact, only refugees, political refugees in general. Bad idea. Stop accepting them. They don't really exist. There are perhaps 100 real political refugees in the world, the rest of the refugees are convenience refugees. Don't accept them. If someone comes to Denmark and claims political asylum, check the person against a list of known persecuted political active figures in his country (usually less than 10). If he's not on the list, put him on the next plane back to his country. If he doesn't have papers, put him on a plane back to the country his flight came in from.
Immigrants are generally good for the country. Let them in. Let them bring their family. Let them work from the day they set foot on Danish soil. If they do not have a job within 6 weeks of arriving, ship them back out. Any immigrant accepted into Denmark should be required to have an open-ended return ticket. If he can't prove that he can support him self within 6 weeks, make him use the return ticket.
The taxes you pay protect your property directly by the police force. The local govt maintains the proof that you own the property. It maintains the infrasturcture that allows you to ward off intruders and usurpers without having to resort to violent means. If you own some land in Sudan or Angola you will realize how much of a benefit it is to just live in your home without having worry if a local warlord will evict you and take over your property.
What is the value of your property? It is largely the amount someone would be willing to pay for it. And laws like truth-in-lending, fairness clauses and the thriving economy increases the buying power of people that directly enhances the value of your property.
Considering it all, see if the amount taxed from you for your property is less than the value created to you by the Government. If the tax is less than the value created by the Govt, shut up and pay it. Dont make snide comments like "paying property tax means I dont own it and I am only renting it." Making such a statement shows the shallow grasp of economics and civics.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact