Facebook boss Mark Zuckerberg launches new immigration lobby group
guardian.co.uk
guardian.co.uk
>"Demand for visas may well not be because their [sic] is a need for skilled labour but rather because their is a demand for workers who can be underpaid," said Costa. He said the GAO study showed 54% of those on H-1Bs were paid at the lowest levels allowed and that the majority of the workers were sent back after their visas expired.
"underpaid" is relative. Borders and visas are artificial constraints. If there was an open global market for labour, and complete freedom of movement for individuals (and why shouldn't there be?) - would it still be "underpaid"? or would it be market adjustment for a more liquid supply?
I think it's closer to the truth to say that those of us who work in the developed, relatively protectionist world are actually overpaid, and that our draw in the zygote or visa lotteries plays a big part in that.
Still, rather than being protectionist or even exploitative - as the fwd.us statements hint at ("Comprehensive immigration reform that allows for the hiring of the best and brightest." - http://www.fwd.us/about_us), wouldn't it be great if capitalists and humanitarians alike could rally around something more like "We support comprehensive immigration reform that allows global movement and equal opportunity for all, regardless of accidents of birth"?