The H1B program disallows hiring foreign workers and paying them less than the equivalent rate for US workers. While there may be some debate about whether tech companies find ways to skirt the law, "we are laying off US workers to save money and replacing them with H1B workers" seems to flagrantly violate the law. No?
Basically, it's a loophole that should probably be closed.
The better thing to do is to lower barriers to immigration, both temporary and permanent, not play one labor pool against another to the benefit of capital.
Discrimination is created by the laws that prohibit foreigners to work in the US by default.
Then H1b and other immigration "holes" soften that discrimination.
TulliusCicero wants to remove "holes" that allow foreigners to do work for the US companies. Such removal of "holes" would in effect make discrimination against foreigners more severe.
Here's what I would support: if another country wants its citizens to be able to work in the US, they can offer to let Americans work there. Every American who goes to work there means one person from there can come work here, free and clear, but the numbers have to stay in lock-step, the net delta can't be greater than one for a given year.
Because unfair discrimination makes it worse for everyone involved: workers (cannot get jobs), employers (cannot hire qualified people), consumers (higher prices).
> That's the whole point of countries.
Of course not.
Countries have their own legal system which could be good (competition between various legal systems), but there is no good reason to discriminate on the government level against foreigners.
Even if other countries discriminate against Americans, the US would still benefit by NOT discriminating against citizens of these countries.
Some Americans would benefit. Others would suffer because competition would be tougher. And of course no one wants a social safety net because that would reward laziness or some other awful protestant work ethic bullshit.
If unlimited immigration came along with a robust social safety net (at least single-payer healthcare and a basic income guarantee) I would be right there with you.
As with all things, you get the talent you pay for.
Any engineer who accepts lower wages than their predecessor is either of lower talent and experience, or is by some situation forced to accept less. "Forced" being a key term.
Talent cannot be measured with the same formula used for guns and butter.