There are probably many who disagree with you. Most realistic and pragmatic people will say that the H1B is needed, and the issue is about how many H1B visas, or what is the H1B Quota.
To that end, the H1B quota should vary. When the economy expands, the quota should rise. When the economy contracts, the quota should fall.
During the IT boom of the 90s, the H1B quota rose to 190,000 and when that tailed off, the quota fell to 60,000. During the Bush years the economy gradually expanded so by 2004, 05, 06, there was a big push to raise the quota. But it was successfully blocked and didn't rise.
In 2007 the economy headed south and crashed in 2008 so no one was pushing for the quota to rise. It has only been in recent years as the economy has gradually recovered that some are again pushing to raise the quota.
Whereas the H1B professional and technical visa quota is point of contention, the real problem with temporary work visas is reforming the H2A Ag worker visa, the H2B Non-Ag worker visa, and creating a 3rd low skill visa with a longer term such as 4-6 years.
Want to find out exactly how necessary H1B workers are? Require that employers pay them the same salary that American workers would get.
H-1B, kill it. Cruz needs to get a clue.
America circling the drain.
No, they’re not needed. They’re not used to bring in “high-skilled” workers that we don’t have. They’re used to bring in low-level tech workers for cut-rate wages. The few people who might truly have rare skills have plenty of options to immigrate here legally without H1B. It’s a system that by definition only exists to bring in low-end tech workers who wouldn’t have the talent or means to immigrate here through normal methods. They serve only to displace available American tech workers so that companies can cut their labor costs.