Posted on 10/01/2003 9:39:39 AM PDT by 11th_VA
MUMBAI: The annual cap for H-1B visas will now be 65,000. This is a sharp drop from the earlier limit of 195,000 visas.
The US plans to enforce this rule from October 1, 2003.
The Indian IT industry has been lobbying hard to freeze H-1B visa limits at current levels. However, these efforts which had the support of some US corporations to retain H-1B visa limits have failed. (Will Europe be the next big hunting ground for Indian IT pros?)
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.
The H1-B visa issue has generated a lot of controversy in the US. Several trade unions representing (local) technology workers have been lobbying against these work permits. The slowdown in the high-tech industry combined with an overall drop in US economic growth has resulted in a number of job losses.
H1-B visa users have been at the receiving end of criticism from unemployed American professionals for taking away their jobs. These visa users are also seen as representative of the trend towards offshore outsourcing trade jargon for moving to cheaper locations like India which is also under flak for spiriting away US jobs.
The visa was created in the early 1950s to give skilled foreign workers a permit to reside in the United States. The H1-B category was added in 1990 to give foreign workers an opportunity to pick up a job with the intention of remaining permanently in the United States.
In 1999, under pressure from high-tech companies and other manufacturers, Congress expanded the limit from 65,000 to 115,000. It raised the cap again to 215,000 in 00 and to 195,000 in 01 and 02.
Top Indian companies have been curtailing the use of H1-B visas for sending employees to the US. Ergo, it unlikely that the offshore outsourcing trend will be affected. Most companies have shifted to the use of L-1 visas (used for intra-company transfers). However, companies whose basic revenue model is supplying manpower to US corporations, ( body-shoppers, are likely to be hit by this move.
Oh, the ranks of the pissed off American's are swelling.
This sums up this whole freaking thread.
Dammit! You could have saved me from wading through 400 posts...
Please don't give him ideas
Excellent advice. I actually find myself wishing sometimes that FR had usenet-style kill files. And I never even thought about such a thing till Dawg came along.
You are right about that. That's why Bush instituted the tariffs and many other trade protectionist measures he has instituted (like the one that started this thread). (I think your crowd calls it "selling out" and "pandering". I call it political expediency.) Just don't kid yourself into thinking he thinks it's good economic policy. He knows it's not. But he also knows how easily people are demagogued on the issue (as FR demonstrates very thoroughly). Bush isn't stupid though.
I'm a trend-setter like that. Thanks.
You have to be kidding. He would be completely opposed to the federal government restricting businesses from hiring whom they choose, simply to prop up the wages of a privileged few (and at the expense of everyone else).
Dawg, have you read Hayek's essay Why I am not a Conservative?
Yes.
Maybe so. I'm not one of them. The reason I support capitalism as opposed to the different socialist measures advocated here is because I want the U.S. to be as strong as possible.
OK. Point taken.
There are no "guys". The Man and The System and "evil CEOs" are not out to get you. Please turn Dan Rather off for a night and learn how capitalist economies work.
After reading your on-going bickering with Lazamataz and crew, I was hoping you would clarify some of your seemingly non-capitalist viewpoints such as sending our free market dollars to non capitalist countries, your advocating the federal governments involvement in increasing the labor pool with the use of non-citizens, and your lack of opinion on the proper role of a capitalist employee.
Sorry friend(I hope you will accept that term), but your posts are seem to indicate that you are not a true capitalist but a capitalistic cannibal. You appear to be pro employer but you haven't demostrated any knowledge of the importance of capitalistic employees to the free market.A screw the worker mentality doesn't work for long.
I hope I'm wrong about you, but sadly I don't think I am.
That is just a bunch of silly spin to advocate the federal government banning businesses from hiring certain people. Actually, I believe in that in serious cases of national security (i.e. I support the Cuban embargo), but the appeals to national security here are a total joke (like Amtrak, welfare, and your other federal interventions in the name of "national security"). This is all about forcing Americans to pay more to prop up the jobs of a privileged few that can't compete otherwise. That is the exact opposite of capitalism. No one is "exporting" jobs or "sending" money to Communist countries. Sorry you fall so easily for such stupid rhetoric (and don't mention a word about the millions of American jobs created through trade with China and India as well as the billions of dollars of investment they "send" our way as well).
It does and allowing people to purchase the labor they choose to be most efficient for them does as well (by allowing them to reinvest the money saved in more efficient areas of their choosing).
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.