Increasing the supply with new highly talented labor decreases the price of existing highly talented labor. That’s a pay cut for people currently working in these fields.
However, when the whole economy has many more highly talented people, more total value is created in America, rather than offshored to (say) India. That means capital creation, new business startups, and spin-off jobs in America. That is an increase in the wages and decrease in the costs for everyone else in America.
So, the proposal is a mixed bag. To which group do you belong? The group immediately affected by a pay cut, or the group generally benefitted by having a large talented labor pool HERE rather than THERE?
I’m in the former group. So I’m harmed.
But let’s be clear, America can benefit. People will have policy preferences accordingly.
Play Ball!
I see what you are saying, except that a whistleblower from Infosys claimed they are not highly talented....and US workers are training them as the replacements....
Not sure our economy can stand the turnaround time that the jobs you claim would be generated from new startups, etc. People are hurting now—legal immigration needs to be carefully controlled—not just catered to the needs of big Tech business and the Chamber of Commerce.