Clinton: It's 'Heartbreaking' When IT Workers Must Train H-1B Replacements (computerworld.com) 482
dcblogs writes: Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, on Monday criticized the replacement of U.S. IT workers with foreign labor but stopped short of offering a plan to fix it. In a videotaped interview with Vox, Clinton appears empathetic and sympathetic to IT workers who have trained their foreign replacements as a condition of severance. She mentioned IT layoffs at Disney, specifically. "The many stories of people training their replacements from some foreign country are heartbreaking, and it is obviously a cost-cutting measure to be able to pay people less than what you would pay an American worker," said Clinton in the interview. Keith Barrett, a former IT worker Disney who was among those replaced by contractors, was not happy with Clinton's comments."She starts off as if she understands the problem, but then dismisses it as collateral damage not of significant volume to address, and blends in the problem of illegal immigrant labor, which is mostly working in unskilled labor," said Barrett.
It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:5, Insightful)
It's heartbreaking that this is news. I also don't like it, and I also don't have a plan to fix it, but you don't see me quoted in the news.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Interesting)
It's heartbreaking that this is news. I also don't like it, and I also don't have a plan to fix it, but you don't see me quoted in the news.
The fix is rather simple really. Minimum salary for H1-B visas is $100k/yr. The way it is now, companies have to pay a "prevailing wage" that is very easy to manipulate. Just using a blanket, but high wage simplifies the process and makes it harder to cheat.
I admit, the $100k number I chose is rather arbitrary. I suppose a more precise statistical method could be used (e.g. poverty threshold x4, or greater than 90% of individual income). Additionally, there should be adjustment factors based on location (California and New York must pay more).
Re: It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:3)
Same could be said of every immigrant that came to America. Why did you ancestors leave the country they came from? Why didn't the Pilgrims try to reform Europe? Why didn't the Irish immigrants try to farm in Ireland?
Re: (Score:2)
You have to be an NBUSC to be president. ted cruz does not pass that part.
Re: (Score:3)
Since this actually is an IT story, maybe we should focus on the H1B program and outsourcing, et al.
I obviously believe she should be in jail or at least have to retire in disgrace just like most thinking people do over her many scandals and lawlessness, but this is not what TFA is about, and TFA deserves an intelligent treatment.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Insightful)
It's also amusing that like most on the American Left, Clinton thinks there should be no meaningful restrictions on immigration, neither should it be fettered by any sort of enforcement...
But because it plays well in the press, she'll make noises about H1B on occasion.
The only sort of immigration she's concerned about is *legal* immigration.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Interesting)
People on the left believe there should be more legal immigration, instead of relying on immigrants who have little ability to fight for their rights, like illegal immigrants who basically have no rights and H1B who can be shipped back to pressing for their rights.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Insightful)
Neither side is terribly ideological consistent if you bother to look at their positions. There are no end of people on the right who argue for a right to life right up until they want to give someone the death penalty or those on the left who believe in taking all kinds of measures because science has shown that climate change is a problem, but will do anything to prevent nuclear energy or GMO foods because the science must be wrong.
We need to get rid of our first past the post voting system, because without changing that we have no real hope for anything but two tribes that end up becoming more and more opposed to each other to the point of absurdity. Even if both the Democrat and Republican parties ceased to exist tomorrow, the Green and Libertarian (or some other parties) would be there to fill their shoes and nothing would ultimately change.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:5, Insightful)
These Republican manufactured scandals never result in jail time.
You google up a list of people that did do jail time on behalf of the Clintons, as a result of their various scandals getting some investigation. Or the people who have had their lives or liberty altered for doing far less than she and her husband have.
Regardless, do you really think that the Republicans are so clever that they can secretly mind-control Hillary Clinton into disregarding the pleading of State Department IT and security people who tried to get her to use appropriate tools for her job? Do you really think she's so weak-willed that she allowed the Republicans to somehow cause her to lie, repeatedly, about what she did, when, how, and why she did it? Was it the Republicans that somehow tricked her into stonewalling FOIA requests, or somehow fooled her into deciding not to turn over her public records as she was supposed to when she left office?
Are you saying you really support a candidate that is so unable to think for herself that she's willing to act, and direct her staff to act, for years on end, in ways that if exposed would show her to be a foolish, lying, reckless, incompetent person unconcerned with the classified information she handled, and willing to destroy official documents for political reasons? That's your candidate? No wonder you're also willing to lie to support her: it's what she does, and thus what her supporters are forced to do if they're going to cheer for her and pretend they like her. No choice, really. If she's going to assert an alternate reality, you have to go along with it when you sign up to be her shill.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you really think she's so weak-willed that she allowed the Republicans to somehow cause her to lie, repeatedly, about what she did, when, how, and why she did it?
Martha Stewart went to jail for less than that.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/ig-report-on-clintons-emails/
Re: (Score:2)
Well, this time the State Department Inspector General, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation did the investigation, not Republicans, and they did find a few damn things.
You must have missed the House Republican Benghazi report that cleared Hillary of any wrongdoing, as previous investigations have already proven.
Ending one of the longest, costliest and most bitterly partisan congressional investigations in history, the House Select Committee on Benghazi issued its final report on Tuesday, finding no new evidence of culpability or wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton in the 2012 attacks in Libya that left four Americans dead.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:3)
You must have missed the House Republican Benghazi report that cleared Hillary of any wrongdoing
You're confusing "wrongdoing" in terms of causing the deaths of our people there (nope, no legal wrongdoing there, just indifference and incompetence) with the parade of lies offered up by her and her boss and the rest of his team about what happened. The events there were a bad fit with the narrative he was using in those weeks right before an election (the terrorists are on the run!) so despite knowing exactly what happened merely hours after it happened - as made clear in Hillary's own words to her fami
Re: (Score:3)
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Hillary has proven that she can drive people like you nuts by simply existing. Another reason to vote for her.
Yup, classic liberal response. At all costs, avoid the actual substance of the matter. She's shown to be corrupt liar? Quick! Attack the person who relays that information! Whatever you do, be sure not to address her policy mis-steps in State, be sure not to address the laundry list of lies the FBI just put in front of you, be sure not to address the huge cash grab she and her husband have made from governments that happened to just get a visit from Clinton as SoS that same week. Don't talk about those thi
Re: (Score:3)
Hillary has a proven track record in government. Trump has nothing.
Which sounds like a good reason to vote Trump.
Re: (Score:3)
It's on YouTube.
I supposed that's the new legal standard for the millennial generation.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, no, they've consistently failed to make it *stick*. They've proved plenty.
That's not going to prevent Hillary from being the next POTUS.
Re: (Score:3)
Which only goes to show how deeply, thoroughly corrupt the US has become. We are no longer a nation of laws, but instead have one America for the powerful and celebrities, and another America for the rest of us.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
The Republicans have spent millions of tax dollars on investigating the Clintons for the last 30 years that have consistently failed to prove a damn thing.
Meanwhile, nobody seems to care about Cheney and the millions (billions?) he and Halliburton made of the Iraq war...at the cost of soldiers' lives.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com... [washingtonsblog.com]
Just trying to balance the claims here. Repubs are nowhere near innocent.
Re: (Score:3)
Just trying to balance the claims here. Repubs are nowhere near innocent.
Here's a list of current Republican scandals..
http://www.democratichub.com/conservative-controversies-list?ctv=scandals [democratichub.com]
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Informative)
You do realize 56% of Americans think she should have been charged?
Is that polling of opinions based on media reports or the law? According to the media reports, Hillary is guilty as sin. According to law enforcement officials, there isn't enough evidence for a successful criminal case.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm no fan of Republicans but she mishandled top secret data.
Mishandling classified data, by itself, is not a crime. It's certainly grounds for discipline, which is what the State Department IG will be looking into now that the FBI have finished their investigation.
Even military darling General Patreus got nailed when he did it on a much smaller scale and with far less exposure.
Patreus mishandled classified data AND gave it to his lover (a journalist). That's a crime for which he pleaded guilty.
This whole thing smacks of two tiered law.
Because it is. An indictment requires criminal intent. None was found regarding Hillary's email server.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Informative)
The statutes in question do NOT require intent, only gross negligence. That is the way congress originally wrote them, with the intent of being able to prosecute under this slightly lower burden of proof.
Re: (Score:3)
Not according to what the FBI, citing a lack of evidence for an indictment.
To be fair we're talking about someone who's name is Clinton. She could shoot the FBI director in the face on television and we'd hear the same conclusion from his replacement.
Re:It's Heartbreaking you're not in Jail (Score:4, Informative)
General Patreus gave his mistress 8 highly classified books with the full intention that she read them, and use them as a basis for writing a book (about him). The Justice Department called the information in those "exceptionally grave damage", and was looking at charging him under the Espionage Act. Additionally he lied to the FBI during the investigation (a grave offense in and of itself). Instead of going after him they negotiated that down to $100,000 fine and two years probation, and separately he was drummed out of the military. The final charge was "mishandling classified material"...
So not only was his offense of far larger scale, but it was deliberately giving someone classified material for personal gain, a deliberate offense rather than one of lack of care. Even the most hyperbolic accusations of Hillary Clinton come nowhere near that.
You can argue that someone with a lesser position than Secretary Clinton might have been disciplined for this, but both the FBI and Justice Department have said that there is not enough evidence for charging under one statue that requires malice, or another that has only ever been used in treason cases.
What does smack of a two-tiered system is that both her predecessors in that office, and other contemporary cabinet members, had similar email setups and no-one is talking about trying to prosecute them. Nor are we talking about bringing charges in the Bush email scandal, where the law was clearly violated and 22 million governmental records were lost... including a number that were subpoenaed in investigations of the Bush White House. If we are going to hold people to this standard, why are we not spending $20 million dollars (estimated FBI costs of Clinton probe) investigating those?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Well hell, I't not like he deliberately installed a server to store the pictures and distribute them to other people. And that wrist slap was infinitely harder than the nothing that Hillary got
#BernOrBust (Score:2, Interesting)
#BernOrBust
I am shamed that Bernie would endorse Clinton, as a NH resident, I feel even worse we have to host the event he is going to endorse her in - what CNN and NPR would at this point consider already done with a bow tied around it.
Clinton is just as wrong as Trump.
#BernOrBust
Re:#BernOrBust (Score:5, Insightful)
It might be fun to say that Clinton and Trump are equally bad, but from where I'm standing that's just nuts.
We know pretty much exactly what we'll be getting from a Hillary presidency - eight more years of the same thing we got from Presidents Obama and Clinton.
With a Trump presidency what do we get? Four years of incoherent policy that shifts on a weekly basis.and wrecks relations with pretty much every foreign state (except maybe Russia, since Trump holds Putin in such high regard).
Trans-Pacific Partnership will just kill jobs so t (Score:2)
Trans-Pacific Partnership will just kill jobs so bad that any gains by banning H1b's will be wiped out.
It's heartbreaking that politicians don't do shit (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't understand how companies survive trying to do it. Surely the people being replaced have little motivation to properly train their replacements, and some to actively sabotage them with misinformation and careful omission. Have any of these companies had catastrophic problems after downgrading their staff?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
we hang together or we hang separately (Score:3)
while at a buffet lunch (all you can eat), it occurred to me: the convention in that kind of restaurant is to not allow the customers to take home leftovers even though it seem wasteful to throw out whatever you didn't finish on your plate.
the reason: they don't want to start a precident; they all collude to 'teach' you that you have no right to take that one final partial plate of food with you. if they all stand together and tell each customer that tries, 'no, you cant take that with you' then they all a
Re:we hang together or we hang separately (Score:4, Informative)
You mean a group of employees banding together to get better working conditions? When has that ever worked </sarcasm>
Re: (Score:3)
I like to use the weak nuclear analogy for unions. When the workers organize to protect their own interests is time zero, and the union they form is 100% for their benefit. At some point in the future, the union is 100% run for the benefit of the union's "leadership", and not at all for the workers that formed it, contributed to it, etc.
It isn't as accurate as the real nuclear analogy, but the progression between these two states seems, very roughly, to follow a fixed curve, and we can calculate the half-
Re: (Score:2)
I find it heartbreaking that in these egregious cases politicians don't speak out against it as well as attorney generals don't prosecute people for violating the law. If you are training your replacement then it is obvious that there is an American capable of doing the job and that a H-1B holder should not have it. I have written my polished turds of elected representatives on this issue and from most I got a non response (thank you for contacting your congressman or senator form letter) or a letter blaming republicans for blocking last year's comprehensive immigration law that would have expanded the H-1B program (thanks Amy Klobuchar you ignorant senator of small things)
But the Americans are not capable of doing the job at the desired pay grade!
Re:It's heartbreaking that politicians don't do sh (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps Mrs. Clinton has observed that discussing any aspect of immigration in a negative way makes her more like Donald Trump -- a man whom she very often implies is pretty much the worst thing ever.
It's a bit interesting that when Mrs. Clinton talks negatively about immigration, she's described as empathetic for Americans.
Contrastingly, when Donald Trump talks about immigration, he's described as a racist.
I think people are wise to be suspicious of anyone running for public office. But, of Clinton, Johnson, and Trump, Trump is the only one that has ever said he wants to limit and reform immigration for the benefit of Americans who are seeking American jobs. He's also the one talking about punishing American companies who engage in behaviors that subvert American workers and jobs so replace them with foreign workers and jobs.
http://www.computerworld.com/a... [computerworld.com]
If you are upset with companies abusing immigration law to the detriment of American workers, and you wish someone would finally do something about it, Trump would seem like your candidate.
This election promises to be another "hold your nose" affair, but there do seem to be legitimate differences in what the candidates want to accomplish and how they want to do it.
Re:It's heartbreaking that politicians don't do sh (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the media spin to be sure: anyone against immigration is racist. Also, don't forget the media spin that "Muslim" is a race. It's all bullshit.
Controlling the borders is the duty of any government, regardless of the race of the people on the other side of that border.
Re:It's heartbreaking that politicians don't do sh (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't have any evidence of Trump naming or implying any race at any time with any of his various immigration comments.
His focus has been on
- stopping _illegal_ immigration
- stopping the legal immigration of people that are at an increased risk of becoming terrorists
- reducing immigration that appears to have a negative effect on American jobs
There is a tremendous amount of racial confirmation bias about Trump, in part because that's what the left always resorts to, and because he hasn't adopted SJW phrases and talking points.
Contrastingly, there is historical evidence of him breaking _down_ racial and other bigotry barriers in his personal and business life.
Re: (Score:3)
Can you show me which quote of Trump's mentions race? I quickly scanned your link and did not come across any mention of any races.
From the article (Score:4, Insightful)
Clinton is making it clear that for Democrats, immigration is an issue primarily about Latino voters --- not tech donors. The tech industry has sometimes thought of itself as first among equals when it comes to the "immigration reform" coalition --- now thereâ(TM)s reason for it to worry it might be last. ...
Some in the tech industry continue to nurture the hope that Congress can come together to pass a bill that just expands high-skilled visas, avoiding the political thicket of other immigration reforms. (During President Obamaâ(TM)s first term, bills to increase high-skilled visas were actually the closest to immigration reform that Congress came, though they were voted down by Democrats.) ...
But itâ(TM)s still impossible to miss the message: Tech, and everyone else, needs to take a back seat to unauthorized immigrants and their families (millions of whom, of course, are US citizens and voters).
Yea. That makes sense. So she has not deviated from her "Say anything to get elected" course. Shocker.
(Note: I replaced â" with --- because quote didn't like it)
It's also probably illegal (Score:2, Insightful)
But hey, what's a little law breaking among protected elites, right Hillary?
Re: (Score:3)
The issue has always been that it is difficult to prove.
It's not "difficult to prove." Prosecutors in the US are busying themselves with criminalizing AGW skepticism under RICO but they somehow can't figure out how to present buildings full of replacement H1B workers as evidence? Thousands of signed separation agreements complete with terms requiring training one's replacement and thousands of credible witnesses somehow can't be used to make a case?
Bull. Shit.
The smirking class pressure groups that run everything have their agendas; hounding Exxon is at t
And for contrast (Score:4, Insightful)
Clinton: It's 'Heartbreaking' When IT Workers Must Train H-1B Replacements
For contrast, here's what Donald Trump said recently [cnn.com]
[Referring to problems within the Veteran's Administration] "I will pick up the phone and fix it myself"
Look at Hillary's positions [hillaryclinton.com] and see if they give you a warm, fuzzy feeling of goodness.
Look at Trump's positions [donaldjtrump.com] and see if they describe specific changes and actions.
Hillary is "stay the course", and Trump is "make changes".
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And for contrast (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Yes, some of his ventures have been failures. Just like MOST BUSINESSES, the majority of which fail. But more of his haven't. How are YOUR businesses doing? Your assertion that he's done nothing but bankrupt businesses is demonstrably false.
2) Screwed vendors? He runs large, sprawling businesses that buy goods and services from thousands of vendors and contractors. People line up to sell his businesses those things, and make money doing so. If he "screwed" more than a small number of them with which he was having disputes over the timing, quality, or delivery of those goods and services, he wouldn't be able to find anyone to sell his businesses what those businesses need to survive. There ARE businesses like that, or were
3) Squander his inheritance? So, that should leave him with less money than he got from his family, right? Which is demonstrably not true, or even close to true. So again, you're lying.
There are plenty of things about him to dislike. Why lie about stuff that's plainly not true?
Re: (Score:3)
Where I use most as "more than 50%" and failures as "no longer in business/technically in business but not delivering any product/service".
How much more than 50%? And is that a count of the business entities in question, or a rating of their (one-time, or whatever) worth as a function of his overall holdings and activity? Over 80% of all businesses fail outright, and of those that remain, many have their activity shut down over time because the business moves the activity into some other entity or simply gets out of that line of work, etc. If his ventures fail at a rate of less than 75%, he's doing better than most of the business world.
Re: (Score:3)
That's when Trump will say "Oh, why doesn't being President pay properly? From now on, I get $500M per year, and I get to keep all this cool stuff. And also I don't want any more of those stupid elections, let's get rid of those. Also, why are non-Trump businesses allowed? I should own all American businesses, in fact, change the name of the country to Trump America.".
Like a typical leftist, you obviously haven't read nor do you have any understanding of the Constitution. Congress sets the compensation for the President.
Re:And for contrast (Score:5, Insightful)
I've mentioned this to other people. I'm Canadian, but I catch Trump on the news.
Maybe he is lying. Maybe he is a complete buffoon. I really don't know.
What I do know is that he at least addresses people's biggest concerns.
Hilary's reaction is pretty much the same as every modern politician I've seen. Same as the progressives in Canada (Trudeau, Wynn...). It basically says, yes it is tragic, but we live in a globalized world now. At best, they throw in patriotic jargon about education and how we can out compete the other billions of people. And to top it off, they'll keep borrowing and taxing to keep their friends in the public sector and banking sector doing well. We're all just collateral damage.
Meanwhile I caught Trump's famous 'unhinged' mosquito speech and he talks about Carrier air conditioning moving their plants to Mexico and the pain of the workers.
Hey, maybe is just a fascist idiot, but if the mainstream politicians really don't give a crap and normal hardworking private sector people...well...he's looking like the only sane choice; now that Bernie is out; for anyone with such concerns.
Re:And for contrast (Score:4, Interesting)
Fellow Canadian here.
Just because he "addresses" real concerns doesn't mean his "solutions" won't make things worse then the status quo.
Re: (Score:3)
All change involves risk. You cannot change for the better without some risk. Some ideas are riskier than others, of course, but "actually control immigration for one" seems as conservative as a change can be.
Re: (Score:3)
Taking a risk that something might become better or might become worse certainly is superior than staying the course and watching your opportunities dwindle.
No, "doing nothing" is often better than "doing something horrifically bad."
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Yep, Trump has lots of ideas, like shutting down the terrorist internet: http://www.cnet.com/news/donal... [cnet.com]
Hillary is Unfit to Lead (Score:2, Insightful)
And so is Donald Trump. Both are hideously wrong for America at this time. Electing Donald is like playing Russian Roulette with a revolver with one round. You have a chance. Electing Hillary is like playing Russian Roulette with a fully-loaded revolver. You're fucked no matter what happens.
Why cannot this country of 330 million people come up with better candidates? WTF is wrong with people. We should do what Australia does and voting should be compulsory. If people were forced to go out and cast their bal
Re: (Score:2)
Sign of the times: people who voted against Brexit are considering taking on other European nationalities and we may see some US Americans looking north of the border for future prospects. How did we get to a point where we have both an uninformed population and a group of politicians that we realise we are screwed no matter what we do?
I believe part of the issue in the US electoral system is that it requires too much money to play and even then the inner-workings may hurt you. Take Bernie as an example, ev
Isn't it heartwarming... (Score:3)
And here I was, just getting over the foul taste from puking all over the "compassionate conservative" bullshit, now I get a heartbroken Hillary.
Believe me, sweetheart, should anyone decide to put you out of your misery, we'll all be about as heartbroken as you're right now.
If we truly are offended (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are two options this should cause, but wont. Option A is that all of her American IT staff could just quit, and refuse to work for her. Force her to use those H1B visa people to run her campaign.
I hear that she can set up mail servers quite well herself
Anyone training their H1-B replacement has witness (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone training their H1-B replacement has witnessed a crime. This is an illegal abuse of the H1-B system and it should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Any company, including groups like Tata should be in jail for what they are doing. Congress should put an automatic criminal penalty of $1million per employee and Justice should target any company that can be shown to be doing it.
Paying you off (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone training their H1-B replacement has witnessed a crime.
I would say anyone doing that has no spine. Yes you might have to give up a severance package. But if you take that package you are saying you can be bought for the cost of the package. Personally I prefer to not dig my own grave. Now if the severance package has two commas in the number that's a different story because then they aren't paying me to train my replacement, they are paying me to retire.
And yes, forcing people to train there replacements should be illegal without question. H1Bs are for when they cannot find domestic talent. If they are training their replacement then clearly the talent already exists domestically. You have to be a serious reptile to even ask people to do this sort of thing.
Re: (Score:2)
You cannot keep an economy going with laws. The only thing this would cause is companies leaving the US altogether. While I am unsure how this problem can be fixed and whether it can be fixed at all, this is certainly not the way.
Outsourcing is so 2006 - robots are 2016 (Score:2)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/meet-the-new-generation-of-robots-for-manufacturing-1433300884 [wsj.com]
"[The new robots] are nimbler, lighter and work better with humans. They might even help bring manufacturing back to the U.S...."
Re: (Score:3)
Funny how they say "might even help bring manufacturing back to the U.S.", but it does not mean "bring jobs back to the US". I wonder how many people missed that little problem.
Get better skills (Score:2)
I've been hearing about H1-B visa issues on slashdot since I joined and my uid is 5000. And quite honestly, I've never understood it. If you keep up your skills and progress beyond basic tech support or other low-level paper-pushing jobs this is never an issue.
In my experience, people with H1-B visas fill one of two scenarios: needs and costs.
The first is where a company needs more staff because they are always hiring. This would be like a Google or Facebook where they need smart, capable staff and can't fi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with that is that you are far above average. The average IT person learns slowly and has trouble learning new things in the first place. They still need to eat and be able to live decently, same as everybody else or society breaks down. Sure, one problem is too many mediocre people in IT in the first place, but that is what they have learned and now somehow need to be able to do.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, there is nothing about you or your skills that is so unique that you cannot be replaced.
And if your severance package depends upon you teaching your replacement how to do your job (see Disney), you are even easier to replace.
They may be useful, but they are not hard to find.
Unless you personally are working for Google or Facebook that kind of invalidates your position. You aren't so rare that Google is fighting to get you.
Look up "confirmation bias". You think that because your decisions have resulted in your position that anyone who has not achieved that position has made incorrect decisions. The reality is that when a company wants to cut their IT costs to save money, your skills will have nothing to do with their decision.
Re:Get better skills (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm of a similar age, and with a similar skillset. I've been replaced by H1B workers - it took two do do my job.
Congratulations on your good luck, and I hope it holds out.
Re: (Score:3)
Giving the audience a show (Score:2)
Like any self-respecting con-person would.
At this time, the choice of candidates for president in the US is "very bad" and "somewhat worse" (your choice which is which).
H1B requires specialized knowledge (Score:2)
Sacrificing severance? (Score:2)
Just curious have any of you been faced with having to train an H-1B and told their now-former employer where to put it? Would refusing to train an H-1B cause issues for future employment?
This is a Deal Breaker (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:This is a Deal Breaker (Score:5, Informative)
Email or call her campaign. Tell them your name, that you donated 8 times to Obama, and you're not voting for her over this issue. They have giant tracking systems for public opinion. If all of /. did that, you'd see her take an anti H1B position very soon. After all, that's the upside to a focus-group driven candidate.
Prerequisites (Score:4, Insightful)
DO NOT FALL FOR IT (Score:2)
Do not fall for the false dichotomy you are presented. The major parties want one to believe that one needs to vote for the lesser of two evils to block "the other guy" from winning. Either one's vote is too small and insignificant to matter and that is a waste of one's time or one's vote does matter and that is support you should reserve for the candidate you actually want to win.
If voting does matter t
Re:She makes money off of H1-B outsourcing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Sure would. But don't blame the PP. Anyone who tries to understand Trump's stance on H1-Bs is bound to end up wandering around in a fugue state for a few hours.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why it's "heart breaking" but she won't do anything about it.
Sure, some people suffer ...
But corporations make bigger profits and spend money on lobbying and campaign contributions and put the friends and family of politicians on their boards.
So don't expect any change from her. You have to fight for it at the state level.
Re: (Score:2)
You can also alter tax policy. It does cost money and particularly time to transport cheaply from China to the US. Eliminate corporate taxes since they are passed on to the customers anyway and you'll have more US based manufacturing. Whether it would completely fix the problem or not is anybody's guess - but it would put a dent in it.
Re: (Score:2)
Worldwide corporate tax rates [kpmg.com]
Individual worldwide tax rates [kpmg.com]
That is what Trump wants, right? Lower taxes on companies so they can "compete" while raising the tax rates on individuals. I'm sure he wouldn't mind paying a 50% individual tax rate as happens in Belgium, or the 54.25% of Finland. He'd be happy to pay even the lower, 45% tax rate of Germany, right?
Re:Her lips moved... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure what is more horrifying, that the AG said she broke criminal statutes and lied to the American People repeatedly, or that she was too incompetent to be Secretary of State.
Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
Re: (Score:3)
Or for a slightly more mainstream citation, A primer [zdnet.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Even her husband wouldn't do that...
Re:Amazing argument (Score:5, Insightful)
But we've already seen a Clinton in the White House so we have a pretty good idea what that would look like.
Yes indeed. A non-stop parade of deep corruption, routine law breaking, blatant lying over things both huge and trivial, and sleazy personal drama at every turn. Yay! Let's have some more of that.
Corruption is nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes indeed. A non-stop parade of deep corruption, routine law breaking, blatant lying over things both huge and trivial, and sleazy personal drama at every turn. Yay! Let's have some more of that.
And that is different from any other administration [wikipedia.org] how? Look into it and you'll find the Clinton's rap sheet to be (surprisingly) one of the shorter ones. Ronald Reagan's administration [wikipedia.org] had FAR more indictments and convictions than Clinton's. Same with both Bush administrations. About the worst thing people can to pin on Bill Clinton is that he lied about a blowjob. I think the Clinton's can be pretty shady but sadly they aren't even close to the worst.
And if you think a Trump administration would be a paragon of honesty and decency you are delusional.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Who prevents the free flow of workers? Government. You can't claim government is intervening when they aren't doing anything. Intervening is blocking the importation of workers.
Re: (Score:3)
From that perspective, you might as well argue that the market distortion here is that the government doesn't permit foreign workers to work in the US under the same conditions as US nationals, since that `unnaturally' restricts the job market (i.e., `national borders distort the job market').
Third parties can't win in the US system (Score:3, Interesting)
And yet in the entire thread there is not a single mention of the only non-psychopath who will be on all fifty state ballots. It's heartbreaking to see the USA be this stubborn.
Has nothing to do with being stubborn. Has to do with the setup of our voting system. First past the post voting and gerrymandering pretty much ensures a two party system. The reasons why are complicated but the end result is that it is nearly impossible for a third party to make significant headway.
That said, I presume you are referring to Gary Johnson. He supports regressive taxation policies that generally will hurt the poor and benefit the rich (flat consumption taxes). He wants to reduce taxes but
Re: (Score:3)
Locally socialist, collectively capitalist is probably the model that successful nations in the 21st century will follow. If China fixed the corruption inherent in their central planning, they could have a more effective society than the US.
The harder question, which I don't think anyone has sufficiently considered, is how do we have a society that preserves individual freedom and democracy without handing the reins of the entire government to a handful of special interests who are ready to sell us all out