Slashdot Mirror
Issa Bill Would Kill A Big H-1B Loophole (computerworld.com)
ErichTheRed writes: This isn't perfect, but it is the first attempt I've seen at removing the "body shop" loophole in the H-1B visa system. A bill has been introduced in Congress that would raise the minimum wage for an H-1B holder from $60K to $100K, and place limits on the body shop companies that employ mostly H-1B holders in a pass-through arrangement. Whether it's enough to stop the direct replacement of workers, or whether it will just accelerate offshoring, remains to be seen. But, I think removing the most blatant and most abused loopholes in the rules is a good start. "The high-skilled visa program is critical to ensuring American companies can attract and retain the world's best talent," said Issa in a statement. "Unfortunately, in recent years, this important program has become abused and exploited as a loophole for companies to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas."
I have been living and working in the bay area for about 25 yrs, now. before that I spent a bunch of years in the boston area, doing the boston software thing.
when I work at some of the big names in the bay area, I see who is working there and what their skill level is. I hear the talk in meetings and see the tech discussions. I see the writings on whiteboards left from meetings. I hear hallway talk. I see the bugs from co-workers. I see the lack of qa and testing and blatant bugs in routines that have 5 lines of code. I see docs that were clearly not written by native english speakers.
the best and brightest? h1b? you HAVE to be shitting me.
big huge lie. they are the cheapest warm bodies you can buy and dominate and boss around. but they are not, and never were, best and brightest. their curve is like our curve; we have some that are stars and most are average. the ones that come over have the same bell curve. some really good stars, but for the most part, you could find the same level of quality here, already.
h1b is bullshit. we all know it.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
In this case, there is no counter-benefit to the trade, other than "inexpensive purchases", without a subsequent offsetting or balancing return transaction. Tariffs and excise duties help to balance out these kinds of inequalities, and help to artificially secure such comparative advantages, where otherwise it would be impossible to sustain them.
The goal of a tariff is not to squelch foreign products in the market. It is to ensure that the domestic products remain in the market, and continue to be produced by the country engaging in the trade. The counterpoint to the principle thesis of the theory of comparative advantage is that a country that is very prosperous, and able to supply itself with any and every good conceivable in a more efficient manner than any other nation it could trade with, will still engage in trade-- is that countries that are less capable of producing goods, still produce goods to trade to the more capable country.
The US produces fewer and fewer trade goods, and consumes more and more trade goods every year, and with it, employment (and financial liquidity) decline, and with those, standard of living declines, or at least progresses at slower and slower rates.
Again, the goal of a tariff is not to completely squelch the flow of foreign trade goods--- Foreign trade goods enrich the local market by leveraging the creativity and resources of other nations, allowing the local consumers to benefit from other country's advances as well-- The goal is to ensure that local production CONTINUES.
Now, are you satisfied, AC?