When you bring higher-skilled immigrants into the nation, they will compete with our own higher skilled workers for jobs we DO want.
Just keep that in mind.
Ah, the cosseted techies. Can't have any competition from the best and the brightest for them. What we need are more strawberry field workers. That is what is best for America.
By the way, I am impressed with your performance on this thread. Lots of data, and a rather calm discourse (granted with few sharp elbows when provoked, while I prefer rather more subtle put-downs, preferably ones missed by the target :) ). You have been a good host for what you wrought, and nurtured the thread well. Kudos.
>>>
Have you seen the threads discussing the possibility of an increase in H1B visa issues?
When you bring higher-skilled immigrants into the nation, they will compete with our own higher skilled workers for jobs we DO want.
<<<
We are already competing with them. Many high skill jobs (e.g. radiology) are easier to outsource then low skill jobs. Whether they work here as immigrants or there as "offshore resources", we will be competing. I see certain advantages to having them here.
It is likely that offshore competition has lowered, or at least tempered growth, in skilled wages. Increased competition from overseas is disruptive and upsetting to those displaced, but smart, skilled people are better able to cope than less smart less skilled people.
H1Bs and other similar visas are like unfettered low-skill immigration, they are a form of protection for favored industries. That is, they alter conditions that would exist in a free-market (assuming we have a border and control who may live within it). I think the best policy is to decide how many people may enter (perhaps as a percentage of current population) and then issue visas in a manner like the AA1 "diversity visa" lottery. Do not be fooled by the term lottery, it involves a criminal background check, a health check, and some guarantee of ability to self-support (usually a job offer). This would allow for the invigorating effect of immigration, not favor any industry, not favor any existing ethnic group (although the AA1 is tilted towards countries with a low immigration rate), and not try to guess needed skills (e.g. If we had a points system they probably would just now have added "web developer" to needed skills - years after the "dot-bomb").
If we are going to tilt policy in favor of a particular skill level then that policy should be towards the higher ends. It is better for a country to raise its average skill level rather than lower it. I fear that current Mexico centered policy is lowering our average skill level with the potential for negative effects in the future. It also is building, indeed has built, a powerful ethnic bloc that distorts policy.