Obama's Immigration Order To Give Tech Industry Some, Leave 'Em Wanting More 186
theodp writes: "The high-tech industry," reports the Washington Post's Nancy Scola, "will have at least two things to be happy about in President Obama's speech outlining executive actions he'll take on immigration. The president plans to grant the tech industry some, but not nearly all, of what it has been after in the immigration debate. The first is aimed at increasing the opportunity for foreign students and recent graduates from U.S. schools to work in high-tech jobs in the United States. And the second is aimed at making it easier for foreign-born entrepreneurs to set up shop in the United States. According to the White House, Obama will direct the Department of Homeland Security to help students in the so-called STEM fields — science, technology, engineering and mathematics — by proposing, per a White House fact sheet released Thursday night, to "expand and extend" the controversial Optional Practical Training program that now allows foreign-born STEM students and recent graduates remain in the United States for up to 29 months. The exact details of that expansion will be worked out by the Department of Homeland Security as it goes through a rulemaking process."
Homegrown Outsourcing (Score:2)
Much cheaper than international outsourcing.
I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the streets (Score:3)
Seriously - the two biggest (ab)users of the H1B system are Tata and Infosys... and they're both Indian corporations.
{rant}I guess in fairness to Obama, he managed to screw both blue and white-collar workers in one fell swoop...{/rant}
Anyone know the lobbyist money trail for this bit of it, or can I safely guess Microsoft, Apple, Google, Intel, etc... ?
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would Obama care about lobbyist money? As of two weeks ago, he's been freed of all political consequences to any of his actions. He can finally do what he thinks is right.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Once you retire from public office any money you have left over becomes yours.
Who told you that? You should probably stop listening to people who are lying to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Citation?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would Obama care about lobbyist money? As of two weeks ago, he's been freed of all political consequences to any of his actions. He can finally do what he thinks is right.
Apparently, he's can finally do what he thinks is wrong, too. [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There are still political consequence (Score:2)
Why would Obama care about lobbyist money? As of two weeks ago, he's been freed of all political consequences to any of his actions. He can finally do what he thinks is right.
He was personally freed from all consequences once re-elected. As he told the Russian President he would never have to face another election so he would be more flexible once re-elected.
As for consequences to the democratic party he is no more free before the recent midterm election than after. What he did and what he will do will effect the party, be it helpful or hurtful.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Eventually Obama is going to be a civilian again. If he pleases the right people, he (or his immediate family) can make tremendous amounts of money as a lobbyist, consultant, guest speaker, etc...
Just look at the money that Chelsey Clinton earns from her array of jobs at various consulting, investment, educational, media and humanitarian companies and organizations. Her success was handed to her on a diamond platter as political thanks to her parents.
I don't know if Chelsea Clinton's employers are getting
Re: (Score:2)
Eventually Obama is going to be a civilian again. If he pleases the right people, he (or his immediate family) can make tremendous amounts of money as a lobbyist, consultant, guest speaker, etc...
Without lifting a finger, after he leaves office, his family will make $221,700 [wikipedia.org] a year for life: his presidential pension ($201,700) plus another $20,000 for Michelle. His family will receive free lifetime secret service protection. He will have a fund of $150,000 a year to pay for staff ("Here Malia, file these papers for Daddy, ok?") for the first 30 months, and $96,000 per year after that. ("Sharpen these pencils for Daddy, sweetheart...").
Just his pension alone will put him well into the top 5% of wag
Re: (Score:2)
Plus he has a net worth of over $12 million, he'd get more from the interest than all the rest of that stuff put together.
Re: (Score:2)
Plus he has a net worth of over $12 million, he'd get more from the interest than all the rest of that stuff put together.
That's peanuts. As I said above, Billy Tauzin got $2 million a year from the drug industry after he let them take as much as they want from the Medicare fund in the Prescription Drug Bill.
GWB got $15 million from speeches, but he's got a long way to catch up with Bill Clinton, who got $100 million.
As the parent said, if Obama pleases the right people, he can make a lot of money after his term expires. This writer http://www.salon.com/2013/07/1... [salon.com] is cynical enough to believe that there's a quid pro quo.
Or a
Re: (Score:2)
Is she a fan of Leslea Garret?
Re: (Score:2)
As of two weeks ago, he's been freed of all political consequences to any of his actions. He can finally do what he thinks is right.
That statement actually is insightful, but not because it supports Obama. What it points out is that he's free to do what he wants because he doesn't need to worry about re-election. Any worry about being re-elected would be because what HE wants to do is NOT what the people who voted for him want him to do.
In other words, he can do anything he wants because the people who elected him no longer matter at all. They no longer have a say in the matter. That's not a good way to run a democracy, I think.
Re: (Score:2)
Violate his oath to uphold the constitution and the laws of the land?
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:4, Interesting)
And, given his dislike for America
I've seen this from various nutballs like yourself and I'm curious. Why do you think he ran for President? Because he was actively trying to sabotage the country? With what motive?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why do people run for any political office?
Is it because they wish to tirelessly dedicate themselves for the good of the people, promoting justice and freedom, working for prosperity and progress?
Or is it because they like to have power, want to gain some personal advantages that come with it, or just plain want to tell others what to do?
There's a tiny minority of the former, but they are outnumbered and out-psychopathed by the latter. The higher the position, the more of the latter kind of politician occup
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Q: How do you tell an Illiberal by his first sentence? A: An Illiberal would typically start talking with a personal attack.
I do not know the answers to these questions and don't wish to offer you mere speculations.
But the fact that he dislikes America is evident in his — personally stated [youtube.com] — desire to "fundamentally transform" the country.
People may agre
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's because you literally sound like you're on the cusp of quitting bathing and spending the rest of your life pushing a shopping cart around downtown with a cardboard sign hung around your neck that equates Obama with the antichrist.
There's absolutely no value in your linguistic torsion exercise that 'proves' the 'fact' that Obama doesn't like America. Why in the world does this hav
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if that were really true, you would've shrugged and walked by. So, no, you don't really believe I am "on the cusp" of doing it. You chose to add your own insult to the already posted one.
And that, once again, demonstrates the reliability of my Illiberal-detection method
Re: (Score:2)
And that, once again, demonstrates the reliability of my Illiberal-detection method.
Im a pretty solid conservative and I too think you're off your rocker.
Obama's policies may often be (IMHO) bad for the country, but I think it takes a large number of terrible assumptions to get anywhere close to "Obama hates America". For one, one of his main roles as President (at least in today's politics) is try to drive congressional action. For him to get his "hate america, must destroy" agenda into action hes got to convince a majority of 535 congressional representatives on his side. Hes also got
Re: (Score:2)
And, given his dislike for America
I've seen this from various nutballs like yourself and I'm curious. Why do you think he ran for President? Because he was actively trying to sabotage the country? With what motive?
He answered this question on August 6, 2008 in Elkhart, Indiana during the 2008 campaign, when he was asked the question by a 7 year old girl, and couldn't deflect her into talking about oil prices. He said: “America is , uh, is no longer, uh what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children.”
He failed to indicate what date "what it once was" applied to.
Here's the youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]
I would say that he's been abo
Re: (Score:3)
And how many of these require congress? The executive's job is to execute the laws. He can pass or veto a bill but he can't write them. He can choose how to execute the law, what laws to prioritize or not but his power is limited.
This is especially true for anything tax or budget related. All spending bills must originate in the house. Ever since he swore the oath of office the Republicans have bent over backwards with fillibuster threats for just about everything, even the stuff they wanted. The healthcare
Re: (Score:2)
I would say that he's been about as successful at this as he has been in keeping his campaign promises
He measures success by the number of promises broken, the number of chumps fooled. The Hope a Dope gets em every time!
Re: (Score:2)
Jail to the Chief!
Oooh, that is catchy!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:4, Insightful)
And, given his dislike for America, he'll have two years to turn her into a 3rd-world country.
I've been calling us a banana republic for a few years now.
Spying on and harassing the press. Check.
Enemies lists. Check.
Spying on the mass of citizens. Check.
Payola to political cronies. Check.
Threatening opposition groups with legal action. Check.
Massive debt. Check.
Paying bills by firing up the printing presses. Check.
Indifference to the rule of law. Check.
Re: (Score:2)
That's extremely stupid even for a Republican.
Theres some irony in calling another stupid by way of an ad hominem.
Calling Republicans "stupid" and "wingnuts" and indicating they "lack the critical thinking skills", that we're "propogandized".... is there any substance to whatever stance you have, or can we just boil it down to
If (isNotDemocrat) THEN
isTheEnemy;
enemyDeservesOneThing;
End If
If anythings going to break this country its the spread of absurd extreme partisan divisiveness. Some day you're going to
Re: (Score:2)
If the Bamster is not an incompetent nincompoop, then he is simply evil.
Magic 8 ball says "both".
Re: I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the str (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
$400k - equal to 8 years wages for the average American household. The AVERAGE worker today earns about 20-25k. His/her spouse probably works, and earns about the same. Total income for a working couple, about 50k.
I wish the hell that I were making a paltry 400k, and worrying about sending two offspring to college.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually less now. Last I read it was somewhere around $44-48k and still decreasing. Here in Canada we surpassed American median income about two years into Obama's term.
Re: (Score:2)
Presidential pension is only $400k/year.
He has two daughters he will be paying for college.
Boo hoo. What is that, two speaking engagements for The One?
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously - the two biggest (ab)users of the H1B system are Tata and Infosys... and they're both Indian corporations.
{rant}I guess in fairness to Obama, he managed to screw both blue and white-collar workers in one fell swoop...{/rant}
Anyone know the lobbyist money trail for this bit of it, or can I safely guess Microsoft, Apple, Google, Intel, etc... ?
Hard time following this. The potential 4.7 million people contribute billions to the economy and without them we'd tank again. I heard the same screwing the american worker and milking entitlements myths repeatedly. It puts me in mind of what one commentator once referred to as "Factoids", arguments which have no truth at all, but people repeat over and over in hopes they will become true. Well, some of that is working, because some people are believing these tales as truths and would happily cut their own throats (mustard and onion extra) to act on these fantasies.
Tech, agriculture, service industries, foot services, etc. all benefit from the well behaved illegals. And we, the people who buy goods or services from these people benefit, as well. It's a mystery to me that so much untruth is accepted these days. I figure it began with Rush Limbaugh and is now carried out by hundreds of others since, who wind up people for profit. Nothing seems to sell like telling people what they need to fear and whom they need to loath.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if the recent push open up immigration on all fronts, has something to do with the bank bailouts caused by the housing market crash. Basically, the banks now own a lot of useless foreclosed real estate and injection millions of people into the market, some percentage of which will do well enough to buy a house, may be seen as a good thing (by banks and elites).
Of course, it increases wage competition making it harder for working people to get ahead and is thus seen as a bad thing by such people.
I
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah ... banksters explain some part (certainly not all, but some for certain) of the immigration reform push:
Head of banking group pushes Republicans to back immigration reform [latimes.com]
Wells Fargo Official Links Lending to Immigration Reform [cis.org]
Silicon Valley Bank: In Support of Immigration Reform [svb.com]
How Immigration Reform Will Help Fix The Housing Recovery [thinkprogress.org]
Re: (Score:2)
These people are already part of the workforce and are already competing for low wage jobs (in some sectors like agriculture, they are only competing against each other because American citizens don't do those jobs). If anything this change in immigration law takes away some of the leverage that employers could traditionally use against these people.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Tech, agriculture, service industries, foot services, etc. all benefit from the well behaved illegals.
It's true, if by x_industries you mean "the business owners and shareholders of that industry". Flood of cheap labor drives down wages, so it wouldn't benefit existing laborers.
I heard the same screwing the american worker and milking entitlements myths repeatedly.
Correct, illegals are not milking entitlements currently. It's a myth, only a tiny percentage of illegals have the means to forge documents in order to receive welfare and other benefits.
But Obama just made them legal, so they will be collecting entitlements in the near future.
I understand the liberal mindset. I am not a cold hearted
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I heard the same screwing the american worker and milking entitlements myths repeatedly.
Well they are lowering the market wage for farm labor.
Since you mentioned it (Score:3)
Re: I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stre (Score:2)
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:5, Insightful)
he managed to screw both blue and white-collar workers in one fell swoop
Only if you believe the Lump of Labor Fallacy [wikipedia.org]. Real economies are not zero sum, and there is not a fixed number of jobs to be had. History has shown that countries with permissive immigration policies tend to have lower unemployment than more restrictive neighboring countries.
What Obama did is not only more humane for the families directly affected, it is also good for the American economy, and good for American workers.
Re:I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stree (Score:5, Interesting)
Method matters. Obama's actions are appaling and well on the way to destroying the country for reason that have nothing to do with immigration. Immigration is a distraction at this point.
It's the constitutional issues that matter - it's been 800 years of wars to establish in Western culture that parliaments, not kings, are ultimately in charge. Ignoring the will of Congress and just making proclamations is a serious structural problem. Now we'll see if congress will do anything about this, or simply give up their position as a co-equal branch of government.
The House has the power to stop anything the government does, but they would have to actually take a stand for once. I'm not holding my breath for that: the idea that a majority of congresscritters would actually care more about governing than fundraising --- well, it's hard to take seriously.
Re: I bet Infosys and Tata are dancing in the stre (Score:4, Interesting)
Which is all good in theory... until the parliament/congress becomes more interesting with infighting and navel gazing than actually improving the country.
When was the last time that congress worked for the genuine benefit of the country, without a primary focus on how it will affect their reelection numbers?
The system, as it currently stands, is broken. Beyond broken. And if it takes an unconstitutional tyrant to get us back on the proper track, so be it. Perhaps a smidgen of anarchy is necessary to remind us why we chose order
Re: (Score:2)
And if it takes an unconstitutional tyrant to get us back on the proper track, so be it.
Is that you, Putin?
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect he wants Vetinari.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Congress has abdicated its responsibility to serve the public interest by openly declaring that it will oppose any initiative by the President just for spite. It's no wonder that he's forced to seek alternative solutions to get anything done.
Re: (Score:2)
Congress has abdicated its responsibility to serve the public interest by openly declaring that it will oppose any initiative by the President just for spite.
Open declaration? Surely you have a link to the speech about "just for spite"? You're not just making that up, right?
Even so, the congress has that power under the Constitution. The Congress is in charge of America, per the Constitution. The President, as leader of the executive has the job of executing the laws created by Congress, you know, the legislative branch, the lawmakers.
It's no wonder that he's forced to seek alternative solutions to get anything done.
It's his job to "get done" those laws that the Congress passes. Simply choosing not to enforce those laws because he doesn't
Re: (Score:2)
It's his job to "get done" those laws that the Congress passes. Simply choosing not to enforce those laws because he doesn't like them is rather the opposite of his job.
Well, he has the power to veto laws he doesn't like, so things are a little more complicated.
Still, the complaint is not that he doesn't do anything with the laws that the Congress passes, the complaint is that Congress doesn't pass any laws that address important issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Still, the complaint is not that he doesn't do anything with the laws that the Congress passes, the complaint is that Congress doesn't pass any laws that address important issues.
There are already plenty of laws addressing immigration that the President has chosen to ignore. Claiming that Congress should be passing more laws on the subject is a little silly -- if the President doesn't like them, what's to stop him from ignoring them too?
Re: (Score:3)
Still, the complaint is not that he doesn't do anything with the laws that the Congress passes, the complaint is that Congress doesn't pass any laws that address important issues.
No, the problem is that the congress has passed clear laws on the issue of immigration, but Obama doesn't like them. So he makes his own law through creative (lack of) enforcement.
âoeThere are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply, through executive order, to ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.â - Candidate Obama
""the biggest problems that we'
We're not a parliamentary gov't... (Score:2)
Now, if this were Canada you might have a point...
Re: (Score:2)
Congress just makes the rules. But they cannot enforce it. They can persuade the relevant Federal agencies (and Obama) to do so by various means, but that's part of the politics.
These are the checks and balances. And the things Obama has done are still within their bounds. As an example, Obama hasn't raised the H1B limitations because that's set in law by Congress.
Re: (Score:2)
"critical thinking skills", I do not think that means what you think it means. You have brought it up several times now seemingly to indicate you do not agree with something that someone has said or done. That would be completely wrong. You further seem to suggest that a lack of critical thinking skills would lead someone to actually applying them "internalize Republican nonsense" as if being dismissive without using your critical thinking skills was in and of itself critical thinking skills.
That may float
Re: (Score:2)
What a crock of shit man. Drop the partisan politics and learn about checks and balances. The executive branch shouldn't be legislating, no matter what party.
Re: (Score:2)
What a crock of shit man. Drop the partisan politics and learn about checks and balances. The executive branch shouldn't be legislating, no matter what party.
Funnily enough, President Obama addressed that very issue in his speech: he said that if Congress doesn't like what he's doing, they should come up with a law themselves. So in the President's considered opinion the issue is so urgent it trumps this principle you mention.
Sound like a legitimate argument to me, that needs a serious refutation if you disagree with him.
Re: (Score:2)
Sound like a legitimate argument to me, that needs a serious refutation if you disagree with him.
Title 8 of the US Code [cornell.edu] is 1000 pages long. We have more than enough laws on the books about immigration.
What he's really saying is that Congress hasn't given him a law that he likes, so he's writing his own. Which even he admits isn't actually within his authority, but he's betting that nobody will be able to stop him.
Re: (Score:2)
Title 8 of the US Code is 1000 pages long.
I'd bet money that buried in that 1000 pages is the justification White House lawyers can pull out to say that what he did is completely legal. Congress DID make the law. The Executive took advantage of some discretion clause somewhere. That's how 90% of the edifice that is the Executive Branch came into being. This is undoubtedly more of the same.
Re: (Score:3)
he said that if Congress doesn't like what he's doing, they should come up with a law themselves
a) They don't have to come up with a law. Congress is not a law factory with lack of new laws being some kind of a horrible problem that the President has to fix.
b) If they come up with a law that he doesn't like, he already said he will veto it.
So, what he is really saying, pass a law I like or else I'll do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you ever wonder if your lack of critical thinking skills has led you to internalize Republican nonsense?
Even a whiff of critical thinking skills would allow anyone to see that Obama's purely political stunt is the only nonsense in question. If he gave a crap about the illegal immigrants he wants to "bring out of the shadows," he'd have wave the same magic wand months ago, or years ago. But he knew that it would wreck his party's chances of hanging onto legislative power. But - to his shock, no doubt - his party got completely spanked in the election. So he's done what he just did entirely to poison the well
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck with that. The current batch of republicans have been the least productive house in the history.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/... [washingtonpost.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/politic... [nytimes.com]
http://www.eclectablog.com/201... [eclectablog.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't disagree with what Obama did in principle, but I disagree with the way he did it. We're still a nation of lex, not rex
If Congress doesn't like what he did, they can pass a law and overturn it. Chance of that happening: 0%, at least in the next two years. In the absence of a law saying otherwise, Obama is free to run immigration policy as he sees fit.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with this is not the way he did it - existing immigration laws have considerable latitude for the executive branch written in. The idea that this is illegal or unconstitutional is going to have a tough time getting through the courts.
The problem with this action is that it's only a temporary patch on the real immigration issues. Maybe it's the best possible for the next couple of years but the real problem is the politics that is preventing real reform. In particular a system that financial rewa
You might be right (Score:2)
There are also other impacts your not considering. The workers here are visas can be sent back at any time for any reason (with a black mark on their career to boot). They border on indentured servants. I know several that put in 50, 60 even 70 hours every
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious how more competition for entry-level or low skilled jobs helps African Americans. Their unemployment rate is nearly 14%, probably higher in lower age brackets. And given the school "achievement gaps" and lower education attainment for African Americans, these are precisely the jobs they need to work their way out of poverty.
Racism is a common argument for African American unemployment, but how does this stand up when the prime competitors for these jobs are non-white and in many cases marginal
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious to know what countries you're talking about considering that the United States has some of the least restrictive immigration policies on Earth. Furthermore, east Asian nations (Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan) would contradict your claims as they've got highly restrictive policies and enjoy extremely low unemployment. Hell, it was less than 15 years ago that Taiwan even allowed foreigners to sign up with a mobile phone plan under their own name. Japan, with a long stagnant economy, is at 3.8% une
Re: (Score:2)
If it's such a great idea, why isn't everybody else opening their borders already?
1. Economic ignorance
2. Xenophobia
People can be astonishingly ignorant about what economic policies work, and which don't. Look at the NAFTA agreement between America, Mexico and Canada. Economists pretty much universally agree that all three countries have benefited, yet the people in ALL THREE countries believe they got screwed and all the benefits went to the other two.
Re: (Score:2)
because people don't want to live in a 3rd world shithole full of billions of overcrowded people they're "xenophobic"?
Yes, if you believe that immigration will turn America into a "3rd world shithole" then you are a xenophobe. People said the same thing when the immigrants were Germans, Irish, Italian, Jews and Chinese that they are now saying about Mexicans. They were wrong every time, and are almost certainly wrong now too. Arriving immigrants quickly rise to American levels of productivity, and within a generation, they usually exceed it.
Re: (Score:2)
When Germans, Irish, Italian, Jews and Chinese arrived there was no welfare state. You either worked your ass off and lifted yourself up or you were screwed. Current immigrants can get a better life in the US than in their home country by doing absolutely nothing except being here.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking that there should be some mechanism for funding X scholarships in STEM for X visas of the H1B1 type.
Corporations receive 100 H1B1 visas this year, then 100 STEM scholarships are also provided this year. Funding via taxes on those corporations.
At least it would make it easier to graduate in a STEM field without the massive debt.
Re: (Score:2)
What worries me are the very bottom — the folks, who come over here knowing, that they may be able to get foodstamps and other hand-outs, that our schools and hospitals will teach and treat them for free.
Of course is though that most recipients of footstamps and benefits are americans. Immigrants generally flock to first world countries like the US in order to work hard and lead a better life. They generally do the work that people born in the US feel is beneath them or agree to work for far less than them. They will live in smaller rooms, pay less in rent, work longer hours and generally put up with a ton of shit just because it is still better than the country they were born in.
The net result is that the
Re: (Score:2)
How would you know that, if the government deliberately does not maintain such statistics and explicitly tells applicants, they don't need to disclose their immigration status [breitbart.com]? They are poor (and I don't blame them) and they apply for the help, which is paid for with monies collected at gun-point (taxes). I would not have minded, if they weren't entitled to any government help — I would've even
Re: (Score:2)
How would you know that, if the government deliberately does not maintain such statistics and explicitly tells applicants, they don't need to disclose their immigration status [breitbart.com]?
Other countries do, I doubt the US immigrants are too different to those trying to get to europe. Also, can illegals still get food stamps with no proof of residency? Here in Europe they can't but they come anyway.
It doesn't surprise me that most people believe the same way you do, as that is way it is often presented. The truth is though that is because the current situation of there being tons of people here illegally is actually better for those who want to pay as little as possible as illegal immigrants
Re: (Score:2)
Yes — in many cases they can. For example, a child born in the US is automatically a citizen, unlike some European countries. Not only does that entitle his parents to stay here, if they happen to be poor, they'll be helped by the taxpayers.
The United States does not have a labor shortage. Bringing in cheap foreign labor means, the less desperate poor Ame
Re: (Score:2)
The United States does not have a labor shortage.
It is not about a labour shortage, it is about the race to the bottom in terms of working conditions and pay.
It sounds like broadly speaking we agree with who benefits the most from immigration though. My take on it though is that no matter what you do people from Mexico are always going to try and flock from there to the US to work, and keeping them all out is an effort doomed to failure. We have a hard anough time in Europe stopping them crossing a fairly wide sea so the poxy river you have is no barrier
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and I don't blame them...
Not at all. It is perfectly possible to a) block (most of) them from entering on the border; b) discourage all of them from entering by swiftly deporting those, who get through.
Catching them is easy — they don't exactly hide. We have done such deportations before [wikipedia.org] — and they worked.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure, I said the exact opposite... Let me check... Yes, I did...
You're able to read about as good as your writing is...
Don't wory they will be exempt from Obamacare (Score:2)
That will help make them even cheaper to hire.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Additional advice for foreign students in the US (Score:2)
Find a partner and make a baby fast! Your child will be automatically a US citizen. That will child will be your ticket to legal residency in a few years, if you want it later.
That was the key to one part of the plan that was announced: If you have a child who is a US citizen, you won't be deported.
Re: (Score:2)
Find a partner and make a baby fast! Your child will be automatically a US citizen. That will child will be your ticket to legal residency in a few years, if you want it later.
That was the key to one part of the plan that was announced: If you have a child who is a US citizen, you won't be deported.
On this note, looking for illegal ladies who want to have a legal baby.
Re: (Score:2)
Find a partner and make a baby fast! Your child will be automatically a US citizen. That will child will be your ticket to legal residency in a few years, if you want it later.
Why are you discriminating against gays?
Re: (Score:2)
Gays can't have kids?
I'm pretty sure they can. Here is a hint. love means nothing in this context as child birth is a utility or tool to achieve an end- not the natural progression of opposite sexes mating.
Re: (Score:2)
Find a partner and make a baby fast! Your child will be automatically a US citizen. That will child will be your ticket to legal residency in a few years, if you want it later.
That was the key to one part of the plan that was announced: If you have a child who is a US citizen, you won't be deported.
Hmm... People just want to read only what they want to read, and then ignore the rest but rather misinform others with only what they read.
From TFA
If you’ve been in America for more than five years; if you have children who are American citizens or legal residents; if you register, pass a criminal background check, and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes -- you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. That’s what this deal is.
Tax tech industry immigrants' salaries to fund Edu (Score:2)
This has been proposed before, but perhaps not strongly enough or from an important enough source, which is too bad because it solves practically all of our worries.
The premise is simple: the tech industry doesn't have enough good workers because our education system is not well suited to producing the necessary skill sets. Therefore, allow qualified talent to come in and fill that gap. Tax employers based on their salaries (for this to work, salaries must be lower rather than having the same salaries w
Re: (Score:2)
The premise is simple: the tech industry doesn't have enough good workers because our education system is not well suited to producing the necessary skill sets.
Or perhaps we could just let the free market do its job by raising the wages of the labor that is in shortage until more people decide to take up that field. Worked just fine in the 1990s, everyone that could spell computer was enrolled in CS classes.
Re: (Score:2)
First, the tech industry is not just software engineers.
Second, while the current US educational system is very good at producing people who can drive good design, it's not so great at producing people who can implement it. The raw technical chops, especially with respect to understanding of advanced mathematics, is a rarity here in the US compared to (e.g.) much of the EU.
IT professionals..? (Score:2)
You don't see many IT professionals hanging out in front of the Home Depot.
I'm just saying.
Now, need to remove all tech jobs from H1B (Score:2)
BUT, if we change how we do green cards and go back to priority for those that we need, as opposed to saying that somebody has family here (which rarely helps), then we bring good ppl here that will work hard and be allowed to participate in real competition.
Social Engineering (Score:2)
Mod parent up (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The summary mention an extension of the OPT visa which are essentially granted to foreign students after completion of a degree in the US. This extension of OPT will certainly benefit these students as the length of OPT typically leaves little margin of error to move to a different status.
I don't know whether it is a good thing or not for the tech industry, but there are lots of STEM student directly affected by that.