I'm not sure, but a few weeks back IBM told some people if they want to keep their jobs, move to India willing to work on local terms and conditions. Thats it in a nutshell. One H1-B is one too many. They are not just displacing workers, but the alternative is to move to the old crap-hole the H1-B just vacated.
“One H1-B is one too many.”
This is a bit naive in today’s world. I have to deal with H1 and L1 visa issues on daily basis and the truth is much more complicated. First, companies are increasingly global and hiring is on global basis. In other words, team X needs to hire somebody. It advertises the position in Asia, Europe and the US. The position can be filled in any company site worldwide (where the team is operating). Eventually, it decides to hire somebody.
It is now much easier to hire somebody outside of US, rather than to deal with the visa issue in the US. The end result is that positions tend to get filled outside of US. Tax revenue goes to some other country, and the company grows elsewhere (which tend to lead further growth there, as opposed to US). I would say this is bad for US, but hey, that’s just me. Wall Street banks especially can hire people (for the same positions) easily in the UK, US, Singapore and UAE. US is now the last place to hire, unfortunately.
Second, this is only about 64,000 visas, and mostly in specialised areas for people who studied in the US (and who are likely to become citizens). My company hires best talent on global basis. Having to hire second-grade talent because of visa limitations makes no sense, and it just leads to filling the positions elsewhere, where it is legal to hire the best talent possible. Free marker principle has made this country rich. Protectionism and socialism makes this country poor.
Bailout bill specifically supported illegal aliens, but punishes legal immigrants. Crazy.