Look manticore_alpha, you should be honest with yourself here. The primary stakeholders in the H1B discussion are not only local labor, but also the consumers of the products and services produced by the companies that hired H1B's, and the investors in these companies. And consumers and investors have a right to obtain their products and services at a reasonable cost. This is not xenophilia, it's simply reality. This is the economic rationale behind Wal Mart sourcing globally.
And as the original post points out, it is not always about low cost, its also about quality. Would you consider Satya Nadella or Sundar Pichai to be cheap labor?
There is another matter. Why don't you look up the phrase "indentured servant" on wikipedia? It refers to (quote from wikipedia) " a labor system where by young people paid for their passage to the New World by working for an employer for a certain number of years. It was widely employed in the 18th century in the British colonies in North America and elsewhere. It was especially used as a way for poor youth in Britain and the German states to get passage to the American colonies. They would work for a fixed number of years, then be free to work on their own. The employer purchased the indenture from the sea captain who brought the youths over; he did so because he needed labour (sic). Some worked as farmers or helpers for farm wives, some were apprenticed to craftsmen."
Basically, this system which brought in the ancestors of most Americans is very similar to the H1B system in place, right down to the duration of indenture: 7 years, while the H1B has a 6 year time limit.
Been happening all-the-time, my friend. (No, I won't use expletives, and neither should you. Surprised this is the top post, despite HN policies.)
And as the original post points out, it is not always about low cost, its also about quality. Would you consider Satya Nadella or Sundar Pichai to be cheap labor?
There is another matter. Why don't you look up the phrase "indentured servant" on wikipedia? It refers to (quote from wikipedia) " a labor system where by young people paid for their passage to the New World by working for an employer for a certain number of years. It was widely employed in the 18th century in the British colonies in North America and elsewhere. It was especially used as a way for poor youth in Britain and the German states to get passage to the American colonies. They would work for a fixed number of years, then be free to work on their own. The employer purchased the indenture from the sea captain who brought the youths over; he did so because he needed labour (sic). Some worked as farmers or helpers for farm wives, some were apprenticed to craftsmen." Basically, this system which brought in the ancestors of most Americans is very similar to the H1B system in place, right down to the duration of indenture: 7 years, while the H1B has a 6 year time limit.
Been happening all-the-time, my friend. (No, I won't use expletives, and neither should you. Surprised this is the top post, despite HN policies.)