Slashdot Mirror
Evidence That H-1B Holders Don't Replace US Workers
Okian Warrior writes: In response to Donald Trump's allegations that H1B visas drive Americans out of jobs, The Huffington Post points to this study which refutes that claim. From the study: "But the data show that over the last decade, as businesses have requested more H-1Bs, they also expanded jobs for Americans." This seems to fly in the face of reason, consensus opinion, and numerous anecdotal reports. Is this report accurate? Have we been concerned over nothing these past few years? Remember, this is about aggregates, rather than whether some specific job has been replaced.
Also, wasn't HuffPo still refusing to cover Trump's campaign as political news, and insisting on filing it under entertainment?
It's not news that republicans are ignorant and misogynist racists, nobody else could possibly support Trump. It's entertainment in that he cannot possibly win. The polls show him leading the republicans and losing the race for them, about which I am not complaining but it surely is a problem for the republicans.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
One Hundred Million Americans of working age NOT in the wok force.
Oh please, I bet there aren't even 100 million woks in the entire country.
If there were, we'd be up to our asses in stir-fry.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Any other day and HuffPo would be telling us about the horrors of H1B abuse by large corporations. However, if it means furthering the narrative that Trump is bad, then suddenly H1Bs are good.
Someone finally states the correct spin of the article. I doesn't matter who funded the study or why, it's needed to attack Trump.
All your laughable assertion did was prove you are an idiot. It absolutely does matter who funds a study. This "study" is from a Libertarian "think tank" (can you say oxymoron?) so you know it is inherently biased against the government and towards the rich White elites.
To me it is obvious that you know nothing about American politics in the year 2015. You really should read more political science, particularly stuff about about realigning elections:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realigning_election
Others have noted that basically the Republican Party is nothing but a fragile coalition of the Tea Party, Southern White rednecks that became Republicans thanks Nixon's racist Southern Strategy and and a few old-school pro-business Eisenhower Republicans.
The last realigning election is thought to be when Ronald Reagan won, he got racist White Southerners that became Republicans due to Nixon's Southern Strategy to stay Republican by convincing them that the White elites running the Republican Party were looking out for them even though they were not. Due to racism by Whites this coalition has held for years but it is now beginning to fall apart.
The Huffington Post recognizes that this once strong Republican coalition is fracturing so they are picking at the scab that was once the Republican Party in an attempt at hastening its demise. If it makes them a few bucks in the process so much the better. Or at least that is what Republicans and Libertarians like to say when it isn't their ox being gored.
I am a Socialist that is going to vote for Trump in the Texas Republican primary? Why? Because Texas belongs to Hillary Clinton and I support Bernie Sanders so voting in the Texas Democratic primary would be a wasted vote. By voting for Trump I can help accelerate the process of the Republican Party collapse.
For me it is a win-win-win scenario. If Trump wins I also win because sane people will either vote Democratic or they will not vote at all. If Trump does not win but runs as an Independent then he will draw votes away from the Republican party and I win again. It goes without saying that if Hillary wins I win.
So voting for Trump entails very little risk for me, and it could possibly help the country in the long run. That is why I am advocating that fellow Socialists vote for Trump too:
Socialists for Trump
So please do us a favor and leave the political commentary to the adults that know what they are talking about. Or study up on the subject some more and come up with some rational commentary rather than allegations of bias by the Huffington Post at the same time you are deliberately ignoring bias by the Cato Institute.
[MODERATORS] I am used to being down-modded unfairly because I frequently go against Slashdot group-think. Instead of down-modding me why not actually give readers a chance to come up with an intelligent response instead? Is it because the opposing position is basically indefensible? Or are the supporters of the right so stupid that they cannot string together a few sentences that (a) make sense and (b) support their position?
A man who wants nothing is invincible