politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Morons. Just a bunch of morons. It was never about AMERICAN jobs, it is about CHEAP EXPLOITATIVE jobs.
Well yeah. That’s why they are gonna round up all the undocumented people, put them in privatized work camps, give them a 100k bill, and make them work it off before deportation at 10 cents per hour.
With zero regulation, and poor record keeping, these people will be reduced to numbers.
Remind you of anything?
This isn't even necessarily true. Most of my friends migrated to the US on H1-B. It's about poaching global talent. It's not like US tech can only rely on US labor.
US labor can leave for another job if they don't like it.
An H1-B employee can't leave.
That is why they want the H1-B employees.
It definitely could. Now whether that's the best thing for profits is a different question.
There's a profit angle in terms of keeping wages down, but there's also a competitive angle. Having a bigger talent pool to draw on means you get better talent, particularly when you're in the top spot in terms of pay, quality of life, professional achievement, etc.
^ This. It's just a matter of will. Mammon demands that they drive labor costs toward zero, though, even if that means throwing their own citizens overboard, and fucking over a lot of foreign workers.
Oh, they definitely could.
How so? 25% of FAANG workers are foreign-born and the growth of US tech labor is significantly lower than the demand. Are there policy proposals for addressing that while remaining globally competitive?
The growth is lower than the demand, so salaries should be skyrocketing, right? But that's not what the numbers show. So I think you're using the word "demand" in rather specific way.
No. The domestic labor growth is lower than the demand, so the demand is met with the foreign workers necessary.
Could and should are two separate issues. They could do it only with us workers it would just be ruinous.
Exactly what I'm trying to argue. It's also a strange issue on the left where progressivism in the form of increased job security and regressivism in the form of nativist immigration policy clash.