LOBBYING FAILS, H-1B VISA CAP FALLS to 65,000

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 01, 2003 12:53:47 PM ]via India TImes ^ | OCTOBER 01, 2003 12:53:47 PM | K YATISH RAJAWAT/ECONOMICTIMES.COM

[Texas_Dawg]

He claimed he had taught American history

I've never said that.

[RnMomof7]

Indian IT professionals are among the largest users of H-1B visas, as US Big Tech shops big from this technical pool. The H1-B visa cap was raised to 195,000 in 02. This particular legislation had a 'sunset' clause. According to this clause, the limit would have (automatically) lapsed on October 1, 2003. Ergo, the H1-B visa annual cap will now fall back to 65,000 visas.

I fear that so much is being outsourced it will make little real difference to the job hunts the tech field

[Bikers4Bush]

I'm sorry, I don't speak crazy. Could you translate that nonsense and get back to me?

You see, you very boldly claimed that you would stand up to anyone who could blame a job loss (specifically theirs) on a politician. Now I'll admit NAFTA did not cost me MY job but I personally know a few folks whose manufacturing jobs were packed up and sent down south as a result of NAFTA.

Those people hadn't done anything to lose their jobes other than make more money than their replacements would in mexico. No negotiations for lower wages to save their jobs, no effort to modernize the facility. Just boom, gone. Thank you NAFTA.

Now please explain to me where in my logic that it/they (NAFTA and the politicians who supported it) cost people their jobs is flawed.

Instead of refuting what I said you babble on with whatever other voices are trapped with you in that thick mellon of yours.

It was simple, you said prove it. I did.

[Lael]

The politicians are starting to realize they are facing a lynching squad called the "Pissed off American Voter" in 2004.

You got THAT right!!!

[Can i say that here?]

"Not really. I'm for creating even more jobs and stronger consumers"

I wholeheartedly agree, but how does bringing H1-b workers increase american jobs or create stronger consumers? Since India and China (to name a few) do not practice free market capitalism, I assume you aren't advocating using our free market dollars to give them more jobs and stronger consumers.

This program was started by the government but when someone advocates removing it, you claim that they are trying to use the government to enforce their will. I don't see how this fits your model of free market capitalism.

[Texas_Dawg]

Now I'll admit NAFTA did not cost me MY job but I personally know a few folks whose manufacturing jobs were packed up and sent down south as a result of NAFTA.

Yep. And many more jobs created here as well. I still don't support the federal government stealing money from me and everyone else to protect your friends' jobs.

I'll make it very simple for you, since you have a hard time keeping up. George Bush instituted steel tariffs last year to "protect" steel industry jobs. Several hundred thousand Americans lost their jobs as a result (in steel consuming industries; what, you mean, those damn Chinese and other "Turd Worlders" don't pay entirely for tariffs?). Why don't you care so much about those people whose jobs were lost thanks to your policies?

[Texas_Dawg]

This program was started by the government but when someone advocates removing it, you claim that they are trying to use the government to enforce their will. I don't see how this fits your model of free market capitalism.

The program is a move AWAY from restrictions. Like I've said earlier on the thread, if your concern is federal government intervention, then fine... let's end the program and let any Indian who wants to work here, come here. Would you be for that? If not, then don't play the federal government intervention angle. I am the one who opposes that. You, unfortunately, do not.

[Bikers4Bush]

Show the jobs that have been created as a result of NAFTA.

Let me keep it simple for you as well. You need steel to protect yourself and wage war. Without it you can't win.

The steel industry surviving in this country is a matter of national security and without it you don't make jack and wind up serving the commies.

Get it?

[RiflemanSharpe]

The politicians are starting to realize they are facing a lynching squad called the "Pissed off American Voter" in 2004.
You got THAT right!!!


I do not think that they know the amount of anger out here. Jobs will be a key issue in the coming election.

[PatrioticAmerican]

"Yep. And many more jobs created here as well."

What jobs? Name them.

[Egon]

Like I said in an earlier thread. I think allowing PRODUCTIVE immigrants into this country is a darn sight better than this H1-B visa program. That means they'll have to live here, support their families here, pay taxes here, etc. That puts them in OUR playing field and they have to play by OUR rules. Anything else is simply unfair.

[RiflemanSharpe]

"Yep. And many more jobs created here as well."

What jobs? Name them.

He is referring to Hong Kong where he is

[Klickitat]

When I posted to you I didn't realize that most of the 300+ comments on the thread appear to be either people flaming you or your reply to them!!

At my former company we had what is referred to as a "diverse" work environment with Asians from everywhere in Asia; China, Korea, Japan, India, Vietnam etc. I think all of them are an asset to the country, the kind of immigrants we need. At the same time, I know that one of the supposed requirements of the h1-b is that those holding the visa not be used to depress wages for Americans. That is not the case in my experience. If the law were enforced, I believe we would see less demand by companies who are exploiting this visa, and less wage depression and other hardships for American engineers. Those companies that did use it would do so because they truly needed to.
Your comment about "you and I also have a right not to work for them", in actuality is enacted by the company as "we no longer have to employ you, since we can get someone else in here at a much lower wage."

[Texas_Dawg]

The steel industry surviving in this country is a matter of national security and without it you don't make jack and wind up serving the commies. Get it?

Yeah, and without federal subsidization of Amtrak we would be unable to move on the next 9/11, and so on. And if we don't have federal welfare programs and housing projects there will be no peace in the streets, and so on. I've heard it before. Everyone is special and needs reasons for the federal government to take all our money and redistribute it to the less fortunate (in your case, the steel companies). Read F.A. Hayek's "Road to Serfdom". A true conservative that one of the most important books of the 20th Century (Top 10 on National Review's Best of the Century, I believe). He had it right on... totalitarians of the right and totalitarians of the left, but the only difference in the two of you is to whom you want to redistribute everyone's money. The Nazis had their special people, the Communists had theirs. Totalitarians all the same though. Sad to see you copy their economic ideas.

[Texas_Dawg]

When I posted to you I didn't realize that most of the 300+ comments on the thread appear to be either people flaming you or your reply to them!!

Of course. This is FR. It's one of the most anti-Bush, anti-capitalist sites I've ever seen on the net.

[Can i say that here?]

"You, unfortunately, do not"

You and I have not communicated enough for you to make that claim.

If you are advocating open borders, do you mean for everyone or only those who would be profitable to our capitalistic market? I am all for gathering all the talent the world has to offer; screw the huddled masses, I want the people who produce. But you didn't address the issue of sending our free market dollars to employees in non capitalistic countries. How does that strengthen the American consumer(employee)?

[Bikers4Bush]

None of the other things you listed are national defense items.

When you get back on track, drop me a line.

Until then, take your meds.

[Texas_Dawg]

What jobs? Name them.

Do you realize how much lower the unemployment is since free trade policies started going into effect? Do you have any idea?

The money saved that is not wasted on inefficiency (via taxes and tariffs) has created far more jobs than it cost. Wal-Mart and all the businesses that it has created that sell to and serve it is an excellent example. And they have profited greatly from NAFTA and free trade deals.

[Texas_Dawg]

None of the other things you listed are national defense items

Exactly. Neither is anything you listed.

[RockyMtnMan]

Don't worry perception is reality and Dawg’s perception is not that of the "common man".

Most rational individuals will not agree with him or for the most part "free traders" in general. I've spoken to many, many people about this trend and only the CxO types agree with "free trade". The way I look at it we out number them 20 to 1 and as long as we win the mind share the Dawgies of the world become irrelevant.

Unfortunately for all of us, if the GOP doesn't take up the issue they will lose that mind share. I'm more concerned that we don't have any choices in leadership that are willing to champion the cause, whatever the solution. As long as the GOP dines on the corporate teat they are going to share the view of the CxO crowd, when they start losing elections you'll see an about face.

Money is important to election campaigns but I have to say it didn't sway me one bit the last election. Now that people get their information online they tend to ignore the TV adds. I think people are starting to realize just how out of touch our ruling elite / government really is. The internet may have enabled the offshoring trend but it also nationalized the "town hall".

The voice and will of the people can be heard loud and clear if you just listen.