Posted on 02/26/2009 5:43:58 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Can you stimulate the economy by shutting out foreign workers? Sens. Bernie Sanders and Chuck Grassley think so. And for all his anti-protectionist rhetoric, President Obama has shown surprisingly little interest in stopping them.
The stimulus bill the president signed into law restricts the use of bank bailout funds (money banks get from the Financial Stability Plan, formerly known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program) to hire skilled foreign workers under the H-1B visa program.
This slap at open labor markets is downplayed as a dramatic but toothless gesture in favor of "Hire American," nice companion to the "Buy American" provisions of the same bill. Anyone who finds either of these two concepts a good idea in times of crisis has not learned anything from history. This superficially patriotic protectionism is a knee-jerk reaction, the politicians' equivalent of kids scratching a wound when they should really know better.
Even in its present form, this clause can do great damage. In this case, the Sanders-Grassley strictures mean nearly all major U.S. banks and financial institutions--all recipients of bailout cash--have to demonstrate that when they hire foreign worker, they tried to, but couldn't, hire American worker instead.
Aptitude, training and skill level become, at best, secondary concerns, and the door to lawsuits is opened wide. The restrictions don't bar foreign hires (who can legally work in America with H-1B visa), but makes them cost-ineffective in most cases and imposes prohibitive burdens on recruitment of needed talent. Banks are not the only targets: the Big Three automakers, for example, are all on the Financial Stability Plan's dole, too.
The real problem, though, is the underlying principle of the law. The idea that native Americans (or Poles, or Koreans, or Egyptians) deserve special status in hiring is deliberate slap in the face of globalization.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Except that the H-1B visa program is predicated on there being a worker shortage. Somehow, I don't quite think that applies lately.
I didn't realise that globalisation was a principle enshrined in American law....?
Not with unemployment heading into the double digit. They should freeze it until the economy improves and when there is not enough americans to fill jobs.
What a gigantic lie! We still have an H1-B program, but now we are just not having lobby groups shower congressmen with cash to expand that to ridiculous levels. There has basically been no change since this expired many years ago, despite the attempts of Microsoft, Hewlett Patel, and other entities that want to see the American job down the Ganges.
>is a deliberate slap in the face of globalization.
>I didn’t realise that globalisation was a principle enshrined in American law....?
Touche`
Sorry, but this is one area where we need protectionism. Some people want no restrictions on their ability to make a buck, even if it means destroying America.
They were bringing in 240,000 H-1B workers during the 2002 IT slump. Shameless.
Do these clowns ever give even the slightest bit of thought to the future of this nation or is it all dollar signs right now?
I’m starting to think they want socialism because it’s the only possible outcome of driving millions of Americans out of work and replacing them with foreign workers.
If there's a shortage, then I'm sure American workers would be willing to work for market-level wages, not ones inflated via protectionism. Is that true, or are we seeing Americans claiming to have no work, but just not willing to work for less than they believe they should be paid?
Globalization in and of itself, can kiss my backside. Foreigners are not Americans, and as such do not enjoy the benefits of bring an American citizen. Importing foreign workers is insanity, unless it can be proven that you can’t find anyone for any price.
It’s all about lowering American wages, that’s all.
I saw the first people we replace with H1-B visa holders are people who write crap like this article.
</sarc>
TANSTAAFL!
I believe the number is fixed at 64,000.
I think the problem is that the liberals have been so effective at destroying the American educational system, there is a shortage of QUALIFIED workers.
I'm not quite sure how it is protectionist to adhere to the basic provisions of the H-1B visa guidelines, that the program should only be used to address bona fide labor shortages. If there is a surplus of labor (which there is now), guess what? Wages either stay the same or go down.
Try again.
No, both parties want the laws of supply and demand to only work for employers, not employees. There are lots of qualified, older IT workers. But they basically get put out to pasture.
Globalization of the labor market = indentured servitude.
All labor markets in truly free societies are local, this is the mechanism that holds supply and demand for labor in balance. For decades we have made it too easy to import cheap labor. If these folks want to emigrate and become Americans, there are other mechanisms in place. If they just want to make money and remain Paki, I’m not in favor.
I saw several Indian Nationals on H1Bs being treated like crap by an agency of the US government when I was a contractor. They had to toe the line or the HR folks made their lives miserable. And the management exploited this every chance they got. The Indians were thankful to be here but knew they were on the short end of the stick.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.