Slashdot Mirror
US Companies Are Moving Tech Jobs To Canada Rather Than Deal With Trump's Immigration Policies, Report Says (recode.net)
US companies are going to keep hiring foreign tech workers, even as the Trump administration makes doing so more difficult. For a number of US companies that means expanding their operations in Canada, where hiring foreign nationals is much easier. From a report: Demand for international workers remained high this year, according to a new Envoy Global survey of more than 400 US hiring professionals, who represent big and small US companies and have all had experience hiring foreign employees. Some 80 percent of employers expect their foreign worker headcount to either increase or stay the same in 2019, according to Envoy, which helps US companies navigate immigration laws. That tracks with US government immigration data, which shows a growing number of applicants for high-skilled tech visas, known as H-1Bs, despite stricter policies toward immigration. H-1B recipients are all backed by US companies that say they are in need of specialized labor that isn't readily available in the US -- which, in practice, includes a lot of tech workers. Major US tech companies, including Google, Facebook, and Amazon, have all been advocating for quicker and more generous high-skilled immigration policies. To do so they've increased lobbying spending on immigration.
As a Canadian working many years as a software developer, while I'm sure examples can be found where this is happening, 99% of the work is still in the U.S. And U.S. employers, as much as they like to complain they cannot find enough developers, are reluctant if not outright 100% against hiring people working in Canada, even with the CAD USD difference.
Just try and convince a hiring manager that you'll get the work done from Canada while the company is U.S. based! I've tried several hundreds of times over the last few decades.
Unless you're willing to move down to the U.S. and be sitting in an office chair at their location 9-5 M-F, you'll never get a call back from HR or the hiring manager.
US policies forbid anything that even smells of work in the US. I'm a Canadian contractor. If I went to a seminar in the USA I'd be dragged through the shit to prove that it isn't for my business and is only for personal enrichment. Easier to just say no.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbFEgFajGU Video on how PERM fraud worked, by creating fake job listings that nobody could possibly qualify for (such as demanding 20 years of .NET experience when .NET had only been around for 5 years) and "publishing" in absurdly small markets.
> The Canadians disagree with you.
What does that matter? Oh, you really don't understand.
More than the 25% of H1Bs want a socialist benefit, or the environment, or work within an industry that's already been marginalized out of the US (the pattern of "not available in the USA should appear). Remember pet fancy? how many print editor jobs are in the US compared to Canada is astounding. Canadian's don't disagree in principle on how capitalism works, they are just in a different ecosystem.
If white-nationalist twits like you do not like me, then I MUST be doing something right
Funny that you lack any ability to refute my points and head straight to the ad-hominem like falling to your knees in front of a glory-hole
I am well involved in organizing scientific conferences. We organize in the US most of the time but went to Canada last year. And we had WAY more attendees that could not get a visa than any other year on record. In particular north african and middle eastern attendees were the most impacted.
So it may not be true that getting through visa and emigration is going to be easier in Canada than it is in the US. Though I have only the data point of a single conference.
In 1963, with the income taxes only 50 years old at the time, JFK said, "“The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive.” John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963 " He was right.
[Citation Required]
'Cause JFK did slash income taxes.....and there was not a corresponding boom of economic activity.
If you're going to cite his statement, you also need to include the history of what happened when people followed his plan. And it did not have the effect JFK claimed it would.
he little thing about repealing the corporate income tax would have those companies, and all the rest of the companies on the planet at least WANTING to move their operations to the USA where they could operate without having their profits stolen by the gov't.
Only if you ignore that they're spending more money to buy goods and services to pay your consumption tax.
No taxes on the used car.
Your plan does not repeal property taxes. Also, car dealers are offering a service, thus putting them under your consumption tax.
No taxes on the used (existing) house, only taxes if you build a new house
Your plan does not repeal property taxes. Also, there are currently no taxes paid when you buy a house, new or "used" (there are various recording fees). However you did just massively jack up the price of all of the components of the house, massively driving up home prices.
No taxes on the money you make and use for savings
Only if your savings is under your mattress. If you invest your savings, guess what? You're using a service and the tax man cometh.
tuition
....isn't taxed today.
money used to pay your state taxes, car license fees
Were deductible until the Republicans decided to raise individual income taxes to offset a fraction of their corporate tax cut.
because of the lack of at least the Federal gov't tromping thru the door to steal a portion of the business' profits each year.
Instead, the Federal government would tromp through the door to raise the cost of all the goods and services those companies buy.
Money's fungible, yo. Tax income or tax consumption, you're still taking money from the business.
the rich consume like hell
No, they really don't. The poor consume 100% of their income. That's a big part of why we call them "poor".
The rich consume far less than 100% of their income.
The absolute value of their consumption is higher, but absolute value does not tell you anything about the effect your taxes have on that taxpayer. The percent of their income subject to your taxes does.
All of a poor person's income is subject to your tax, because they're spending all of their paycheck on goods and services. Only a portion of a rich person's income is subject to your tax, because they're not spending all of their "paycheck" on goods and services.
Aren't drug prices subsidised too? In the UK there is a fixed cost per prescription, about Ã10. That is usually a month's worth of drugs. You get medical equipment for free too, they will even come and modify your house to your needs if necessary.
No. Drug prices vary by province, but not by a huge amount. The differences are usually due to distribution costs or pharmacy dispensing costs. Rather instead of subsidizing it, the entire country(all provinces, territories, and federal government) buy for the entire country at a flat rate. The projected costs are based on year-on-year trends for the demand of the drugs required for the amount of users. We don't get our medical equipment free, crutches are $39 at my local hospital if you're wondering.
Most people pay with their supplemental insurance for it, and nobody comes to modify your house. You pay for that, if it's a fundamentally life changing thing like a stroke? You're better off selling your old property and buying something new. You may be covered to have someone help take care of you, but in general your family is the one who's doing all the hard work.
Give you an example from the full rundown, diagnostics, costs, everything. When my grandmother was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer, the first doctor diagnosing was a ER doctor because she coughed up blood. From there it was 11 days to see her family doctor. 39 days to see her specialist. 40 days to meet with the oncologist, 15 days to start targeted radiation therapy. The doctors and oncologist remarked at the fast turn around time and asked if she knew someone "high up the chain" who might have bumped her name for faster treatment. Most people wait double. She was a head nurse, nursing teacher, and had a bunch of other certifications so maybe someone did, but if they did - we didn't know about it.
For her treatment, we drove 51km one-way. Luckily her residence was "far enough away" that the VON(Victorian Order of Nurses - The VON is a not-for-profit care program, and is mainly funded by donations) which operated a hospice, and took patients to the treatment center would take her on. After that treatment, she was cut loose by the system until her care became so bad that family could no longer take care of her. That was around 9 months of pure hell with degrading health, memory, and various bouts of cancer and drug induced dementia of me taking care of her because both my dad and uncle worked between 40 and 50hrs/week and had no room in their houses, or because it wasn't very good to have a person who couldn't keep their balance walk up or downstairs for a bathroom. Her planning a head, before that she put herself on the list for a nursing home. The average wait time is 4 years, luckily or unluckily someone died and because she was already in the "last 6mo of estimated life" they got her in. She was in there for 3 weeks before she took an even harder turn. The hospital had no room for long term care for the last 6mo. Rather it was the VON again, who had space in a end-of-life hospice care facility. That was the last 27 days of her life.
The state of care for end-of-life is pretty shit. It's shit enough that the government offers "escape" programs for people where a nurse comes in for a couple of days so you can bug the hell out, and try not to have a complete breakdown.
What we pay is based in earnings and hard to calculate as it's rolled up with other social security items, but it's affordable and free for those on lower incomes.
You pay pretty much for everything unless you're old age or on disability here. What is considered "critical care" is mostly covered, but there's plenty of people who go financially broke from the secondary costs of healthcare. And the 'safety net' is really your family.
Om, nomnomnom...
Not so. Entry under visa waiver allows you to go to seminar for business.
Yeah. After getting dragged through shit by the Immigration Officer. Years ago, a company I worked for purchased a US software solution for the Y2K issue. I was sent to Detroit for training. Training on software my Canadian company bought, to use in its Canadian location. 20 minutes arguing with US Immigration that no I wasn't stealing American jobs, I was being trained on software we had purchased to use in Canada. All the guy kept saying was I needed a work visa...to be trained on software we had bought. He finally realized his stupidity and let me through the border but the 20 minutes of grilling was enough to make me want to turn around and go home.