# Immigration for techies in US **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 24, 2000, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070 "2000-12-24T07:07:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2000, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/21 "2000-12-25T19:52:15Z")
FTR, additional discussion of Norman Matloff’s shaky statistics and gross over-generalizations can be found at [http://www.leconsulting.com/arthurhu/index/matloff.htm](http://www.leconsulting.com/arthurhu/index/matloff.htm) This article echoes the sentiments that **ruadh** and I put forward – that Matloff habitually fails to adjust for education levels, experience levels, onerous immigration regulations and the like. ---
**Author:** ![ruadh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@ruadh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruadh)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2000, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/22 "2000-12-25T20:22:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kyuzo \* > **Nowhere in his paper does he say anything about retraining anyone with basic coding skills. He mentions retraining experienced or competent programmers.** Semantics, semantics, semantics. Bottom line is he bases his claim that the shortage is “manufactured” on his belief that firms wouldn’t hire only people who already have these skills if there were really a shortage of workers. And that is not evidence, that is opinion. > [@](#): > > What are these stricter requirements? I actually misread this part of your original post (sorry, as I said it was 1.00 a.m.) to say “x% of employers are not paying even the prevailing wage [low as Matloff claims that is]”. GAL 2-98 imposed new penalties on employers who don’t pay prevailing wage. I’ll have to take another look at that 1996 DOL study before commenting on the claim that x% weren’t paying what they promised on the LCA. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > 79% of the H-1Bs make salaries under $50,000, hardly what ``geniuses’’ are paid in this field, where a top programmer can earn a salary approaching or even exceeding $100,000. > > Would the engineer you know accept $50,000 a year? What’s Matloff’s source for this statistic? I can only recall _one_ of the H-1Bs I dealt with making below $50,000 a year. > [@](#): > > Did you even read sections 9.2.7 and 9.2.8, which list the view of some immigrants on the matter? 9.2.7 even lists an example of a naturalized citizen competing with an H-1B visa holder for a job, and the H-1B visa holder taking it for less than what a normal master’s degree holder would. Yes, I read it. It lists one person’s opinion that he didn’t get a job because an H-1B holder was willing to take it for less. The vast majority of people expressing these opinions are still natural born US citizens - I’ve yet to see any great outcry on the subject from green card holders and the naturalized. Of course, you can always find one or two people to back up any opinion you want. 'Course this guy also goes on to complain that he had to settle for a job at “only” $60,000. Now I thought the whole point of this diatribe was that H-1Bs are underpaid compared to US citizens, so where does this citizen’s (alleged) underpayment fit into that argument? (BTW, Matloff says this quote is taken from the San Jose Mercury News. There is no record of this article in the SJMN’s online archives.) As for 9.2.8, that’s back to age discrimination, which I already said was a different subject for discussion. > [@](#): > > What reason does his stand on immigration give me to doubt his evidence? Are you suggesting he is xenophobic? Perhaps you should read more about his background … I’m quite familiar with his background, thank you very much, and I made no such suggestion, and please don’t put words in my mouth. In Matloff’s view it isn’t simply that the H-1Bs are depressing US wages, or putting US citizens out of work, he just wants to reduce immigration - full stop. “In all categories, for all nationalities, at all socioeconomic levels”. The evidence he presents therefore must not be viewed as coming from an objective source, and should be taken with the appropriate amount of caution. I’m sure if I posted data from, I dunno, the Let 'Em All In Coalition you’d have the same response to it. ---
**Author:** ![Kyuzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@Kyuzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyuzo)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2000, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/23 "2000-12-25T20:52:49Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > Second, even if these examples were typical, that wouldn’t disprove the need for technical immigration. In your opinion, what would disprove the need for technical immigration? Secondly, do you have any experience working as a computer programmer? If not, then how do you know that the most important thing is not knowledge in the language of the minute, but rather general programming talent? (I have personal experience in the industry and work as a software developer, and I have seen first hand professionals becoming proficient in a new language without any previous experience.) All of your criticisms so far seem to follow along that pattern - there is no shortage of programmers, but there is a shortage of programmers that have experience in Language X, Y, Z, P, Q. So you honestly feel that it is necessary to import a new worker instead of allowing an experienced programmer to learn a new language on the job? What do you think of Jim McCarthy’s, a software development manager at Microsoft, statement: > [@](#): > > The biggest mistake I see managers make as they hire people for software development teams is that they overvalue a particular technology. To verify this tendency, all you have to do is look at the want ads: `Wanted: foobar programmers. Experience with whatsit required.’ Obviously, conversance with a given technology is a wonderful attribute in a candidate, but in the final analysis it’s an extra, not mandatory. After all, most software development technologies have a half-life of about one year. ---
**Author:** ![ruadh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@ruadh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruadh)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2000, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/24 "2000-12-25T20:59:13Z")
Whatever Mr McCarthy’s opinion, Microsoft still has a _shitload_ of H-1B workers. ---
**Author:** ![Kyuzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@Kyuzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyuzo)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2000, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/25 "2000-12-25T21:20:04Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by ruadh_ > Bottom line is he bases his claim that the shortage is “manufactured” on his belief that firms wouldn’t hire only people who already have these skills if there were really a shortage of workers. Well, he also bases his claim on other data, such as the low rate for offers to interviewees. How do you reconcile the offer rates (which range from 5% to 50%) in Section 4.1 with claims of a shortage so great it is necessary to import technical workers? (As he notes, these are the offer rates to those who have been selected for interviews, thus presumably have these supposedly crucial narrow skill sets.) If there is such a shortage, why aren’t the offer rates significantly higher? ---
**Author:** ![ruadh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@ruadh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruadh)\ **Post date:** [December 25, 2000, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/26 "2000-12-25T21:59:10Z")
I don’t see why you’re making the assumption that the fact these applicants are even granted an interview demonstrates that they’re qualified for the job. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that a company desperate for workers will interview as many people as possible, even if their paper qualifications aren’t quite right, but then still decide they don’t want to commit to _hiring_ any of those underqualified people. I’m just speculating of course. But so is Matloff, really. ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/27 "2000-12-26T01:34:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kyuzo \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > Second, even if these examples were typical, that wouldn’t disprove the need for technical immigration. > > In your opinion, what would disprove the need for technical immigration? > \*\* More rigorous statistics than what Matloff cited, for one thing. Besides, you’re dodging the issue. Matloff claimed that these incidences of fraud disproved the need for additional high-tech manpower. Common sense dictates that that fraud will always exist, and that its existence is inconclusive evidence. > [@](#): > > \*\*Secondly, do you have any experience working as a computer programmer? If not, then how do you know that the most important thing is not knowledge in the language of the minute, but rather general programming talent? > \*\* First of all, I have over a decade of experience as a programmer AND a university instructor. Second, I never claimed that general programming talent is THE most important thing, so please don’t put words in my mouth. Knowledge and general talent are BOTH important, which is EXACTLY why I question Matloff’s simplistic analysis. > [@](#): > > **All of your criticisms so far seem to follow along that pattern - there is no shortage of programmers, but there is a shortage of programmers that have experience in Language X, Y, Z, P, Q.** First of all, I never said that there is no shortage of programmers. I simply granted that point for the sake of argument. Second, my claims were more general than that. I said that even if a shortage exists, programming jobs often require fairly specialized skills. This is not the same as saying “there is a shortage of programmers that have experience in Language X, Y, Z, P, Q,” so please don’t put words in my mouth. > [@](#): > > **So you honestly feel that it is necessary to import a new worker instead of allowing an experienced programmer to learn a new language on the job?** Sometimes, yes. Sometimes, no. Like Matloff, you are grossly oversimplifying. > [@](#): > > \*\*What do you think of Jim McCarthy’s, a software development manager at Microsoft, statement: > > > [@](#): > > > > The biggest mistake I see managers make as they hire people for software development teams is that they overvalue a particular technology. To verify this tendency, all you have to do is look at the want ads: `Wanted: foobar programmers. Experience with whatsit required.’ Obviously, conversance with a given technology is a wonderful attribute in a candidate, but in the final analysis it’s an extra, not mandatory. After all, most software development technologies have a half-life of about one year. > > \*\* That’s his opinion. Other managers disagree. Additionally, not all technologies are “software development technologies.” As I said, you and Matloff and oversimplifying tremendously. For example, there is a great demand for programmers who understand electronic design – even if they don’t actually have to develop hardware. Even among software technologies, many of them don’t change yearly. Object-oriented design principles, for example, have been around for over a decade – yet I’ve often heard managers complain that good object-orientation skills are in short supply. ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/28 "2000-12-26T01:42:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kyuzo \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by ruadh_ > > Bottom line is he bases his claim that the shortage is “manufactured” on his belief that firms wouldn’t hire only people who already have these skills if there were really a shortage of workers. > > Well, he also bases his claim on other data, such as the low rate for offers to interviewees. How do you reconcile the offer rates (which range from 5% to 50%) in Section 4.1 with claims of a shortage so great it is necessary to import technical workers? (As he notes, these are the offer rates to those who have been selected for interviews, thus presumably have these supposedly crucial narrow skill sets.)\*\* That’s an unwarranted conclusion. One could just as easily argue that the companies are casting their nets far and wide BECAUSE they’re desperate – hoping that they’ll find someone who will somehow suffice. After much searching, they may even settle on someone who doesn’t quite make the cut – leaving other underqualified applicants in the lurch. Being interviewed doesn’t automatically mean that the person has the “crucial narrow skill set.” I’ve seen this happen before, at two of the companies I’ve worked for. If they can’t find someone who’s just right, they may have to interview dozens of applicants before they find someone who’s “close enough.” ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/29 "2000-12-26T05:54:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kyuzo \* > **Companies shun older workers, because they are more expensive than younger Americans or H-1Bs. If you think it is because they do not have the most current skills and are therefore useless, please read section 7.2.** **POINT #1** : Section 7.2 does not support that claim. It merely asserts that managers _should_ hire based on aptitude rather than existing skills. This is **BY NO MEANS** the same as saying that companies are deliberately shunning older workers, and it’s disingenuous to twist its words that way. **POINT #2** : **Once again** , Matloff and Kyuzo are making absurd generalizations. Sometimes the selections are based on cost, and sometimes, they are based on skill sets. Common sense dictates that either approach may be warranted, depending on the situation. **POINT #3** : Even if we grant Matloff’s dubious claim, that’s STILL not an example of ageism. The companies aren’t discriminating based on age, they’re discriminating based on cost. Of course, it’s more convenient to call it “ageism,” since that gives Matloff’s claim more emotional punch. It also makes it easier to blame innocent foreigners for this unfortunate situation. **POINT #4** : Even if Matloff were correct, this would only be a point against the current H-1B regulations, which apply exclusively to _temporary_ workers. It _still_ wouldn’t demonstrate his claim that there’s no lack of technical manpower. Apparently, Matloff has this glaring habit of focusing on tangential issues, even when they don’t support his main point. ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/30 "2000-12-26T06:27:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ruadh \* > \*\*In Matloff’s view it isn’t simply that the H-1Bs are depressing US wages, or putting US citizens out of work, he just wants to reduce immigration - full stop. “In all categories, for all nationalities, at all socioeconomic levels”. The evidence he presents therefore must not be viewed as coming from an objective source, and should be taken with the appropriate amount of caution. \*\* Consider how his arguments focus exclusively on debunking the claims of a computer programmer shortage, for example. For the sake of argument, let’s suppose that he’s correct. Should we believe that if there’s no lack of computer programmers, then there’s no shortage of technical manpower in all categories? That this merits putting a full stop to immigration in general? Obviously not. ---
**Author:** ![Kyuzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@Kyuzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyuzo)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/31 "2000-12-26T13:58:46Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > Second, I never claimed that general programming talent is THE most important thing, so please don’t put words in my mouth. Knowledge and general talent are BOTH important, which is EXACTLY why I question Matloff’s simplistic analysis. I sincerely apologize for my misstatement. I should have stated it the opposite way, as **my** claim is that general programming talent is the most important thing. I noticed many cases in the website you provided that mocks Matloff for his claim in this matter, instead placing the most importance on “marketable skills.” Clearly, we disagree on this matter. Would it be possible for you to explain to me why you find Matloff’s statistics so questionable? > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > Consider how his arguments focus exclusively on debunking the claims of a computer programmer shortage, for example. The reason is that the vast majority of H-1B’s are programmers. I will freely grant you that there may be a shortage of other technical workers. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > First off, most H-1B’s are fresh out of school Why would this be? Isn’t it true that Computer Science enrollments have increased greatly in recent years? As a university professor(presuming you work in the U.S.), what are you failing to do to prepare American students to fill these positions? How is it that an H-1B fresh out of school has skills that an American student fresh out of school does not have? Since H-1Bs are for temporary help and most are fresh out of school, shouldn’t we expect the amount “required” by industry to begin to reduce as the amount of computer science graduates increases? On the contrary, the cap on H-1Bs is routinely reached before the end of the year, and the cap has just been increased yet again. What solution do you propose for the long term to equip students and workers with these supposedly necessary cutting edge skills, since producing more computer science graduates does not appear to be working? > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > Section 7.2 does not support that claim. It merely asserts that managers should hire based on aptitude rather than existing skills. This is BY NO MEANS the same as saying that companies are deliberately shunning older workers, Companies claim that these older programmers do not have the required experience and refuse to hire for that reason. This section refutes the importance of specific language experience. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > Sometimes the selections are based on cost If the selections are based on cost, that does not indicate a shortage of programmers, just a shortage at the **right cost**. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > sometimes, they are based on skill sets It is clear we disagree about required skill sets. My opinion is that this focus on specific skills is not as necessary as any glance at the job classifieds would indicate it is. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > The companies aren’t discriminating based on age, they’re discriminating based on cost. If older workers cost more, and they discriminate based on cost, what effect does that have on the employment of older workers? > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > Even if Matloff were correct, this would only be a point against the current H-1B regulations, which apply exclusively to temporary workers. The point is that the H-1B program is being abused, and is not being used as help for a “temporary shortage” of workers with specific skill sets. As Matloff points out: > [@](#): > > Technology will continue to change rapidly in the coming years. Therefore unless employers abandon their current obsession with specific software skills, the perceived/claimed labor ``shortage’’ will be permanent. ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/32 "2000-12-26T18:02:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Kyuzo \* > \*\*[Would it be possible for you to explain to me why you find Matloff’s statistics so questionable? > \*\* Ruadh and I have already posted several reasons why we find them to be dubious. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > Consider how his arguments focus exclusively on debunking the claims of a computer programmer shortage, for example. > > The reason is that the vast majority of H-1B’s are programmers. I will freely grant you that there may be a shortage of other technical workers. > \*\* Well, we can agree on that. However, ruadh has quoted Matloff as stating that immigration must be halted at all levels, for all nationalities, in all socioeconomic situations. I agree with ruadh that this means we should view his “statistics” with a great measure of caution. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > First off, most H-1B’s are fresh out of school > > Why would this be? Isn’t it true that Computer Science enrollments have increased greatly in recent years? As a university professor(presuming you work in the U.S.), what are you failing to do to prepare American students to fill these positions? How is it that an H-1B fresh out of school has skills that an American student fresh out of school does not have? \*\* I am baffled by your question. My statement was simply that most H-1B’s are new graduates. This does not mean that American professors are failing to train American students. By no means is this a logical inference. If there’s a lack of manpower, it could be that not enough American youths are enrolling in technical fields – or that not enough of them are making the grade. > [@](#): > > \*\* > What solution do you propose for the long term to equip students and workers with these supposedly necessary cutting edge skills, since producing more computer science graduates does not appear to be working?\*\* Long term solutions would include increased promotion of technical field and revisions to the educational system and industry training programs. HOWEVER, that’s all beside the point. The present discussion is about whether there is a genuine shortage of technical manpower. Discussing long-term solutions is important, but they can neither prove nor disprove the topic at hand. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > Section 7.2 does not support that claim. It merely asserts that managers should hire based on aptitude rather than existing skills. This is BY NO MEANS the same as saying that companies are deliberately shunning older workers, > > Companies claim that these older programmers do not have the required experience and refuse to hire for that reason. This section refutes the importance of specific language experience. > \*\* No, Section 7.2 merely presents the alternate viewpoint of some people in industry. As ruadh said, that’s opinion, not evidence. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > Sometimes the selections are based on cost > > If the selections are based on cost, that does not indicate a shortage of programmers, just a shortage at the **right cost**. > \*\* Not necessarily. It only means that _the company in question_ can’t afford the high-end programmers. It doesn’t necessarily reflect the industry at large. Moreover, in that context, I was refuting the claim that the older workers are necessarily being shunned because of cost. As I said, sometimes they are, sometimes they aren’t, and it would be disingenuous to claim otherwise. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > sometimes, they are based on skill sets > > It is clear we disagree about required skill sets. My opinion is that this focus on specific skills is not as necessary as any glance at the job classifieds would indicate it is. > \*\* Once again though, remember the context of this claim. We were talking about the companies’ _motives_ in bypassing older employees – not whether their decisions were prudent. Even if you disagree regarding the need for skill sets, its intellectually reckless to insist that they were motivated by anything else. ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/33 "2000-12-26T18:13:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > The companies aren’t discriminating based on age, they’re discriminating based on cost. > > If older workers cost more, and they discriminate based on cost, what effect does that have on the employment of older workers? > \*\* I’m not saying that older workers can’t be disenfranchised. However, this doesn’t mean that they’re being discriminated against based specifically on their age, and its dishonest of them to claim otherwise. In some cases, they are genuinely victims (see Intel). However, if a company is merely discriminating based on cost, then that doesn’t automatically translate to age discrimination. Sometimes, the older employees will be shut out, but the same could be said of younger employees who demand unreasonably high salaries. > [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > > Even if Matloff were correct, this would only be a point against the current H-1B regulations, which apply exclusively to temporary workers. > > The point is that the H-1B program is being abused, and is not being used as help for a “temporary shortage” of workers with specific skill sets. > \*\* Which still doesn’t mean that the labor shortage is not genuine. It only means that such abuse needs to be prevented (knowing, of course, that abuse can never be eliminated outright). I am deeply disappointed that Matloff must resort to such outrageous leaps of logic. In fact, Clinton recently passed some legislation that’s designed to prevent such abuse, by preventing employers from exploiting their H-1B workers. Matloff’s article, FTR, was written more than two years before these laws were passed. I fully expect that his dubious statistics will becom even more obsolete. ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/34 "2000-12-26T19:31:12Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Kyuzo \* > \*\* How is it that an H-1B fresh out of school has skills that an American student fresh out of school does not have?._\* Isn’t it obvious? Not all students are alike. Sometimes the American student will be more capable, while sometimes, it’s the foreigner who’ll be more skilled. Everyday experience bears this out. > [@](#): > > \*\* Since H-1Bs are for temporary help and most are fresh out of school, shouldn’t we expect the amount “required” by industry to begin to reduce as the amount of computer science graduates increases?\*\* Only if the demand does not increase accordingly, and if the proportionate quality of the graduates does not degrade. Besides, the number of computer science enrollees actually _decreased_ a few years ago. Only recently did it return with a modest upswing. > [@](#): > > \*\* On the contrary, the cap on H-1Bs is routinely reached before the end of the year, and the cap has just been increased yet again.\*\* If anything, that supports the widespread claim that demand for technical manpower is _increasing_. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2000, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/35 "2000-12-26T20:48:45Z")
A scene down at the immigration office: “Ok, Programmers… Over there with the tired!” “Engineers, you go line up with the poor.” “Web Designers, you go stand with the huddled masses.” “Now ALL of you, get out of our country!” Y’all should send back the Statue of Liberty. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2000, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/36 "2000-12-27T00:43:25Z")
It’s worth considering if the problem itself isn’t already becoming obsolete. There is already a substantial trend in some industries toward hiring foreign technical staff while leaving them in their own countries, avoiding immigration problems altogether. I myself am working more closely all the time with a branch office (actually a partnership legally, due to local requirements and nationalism) we’ve set up in India, and we have other such operations started or getting started in Poland and Turkey, with others coming up. A further benefit is that people who can stay home and still get paid hugely by local salaries are more likely to stick with us long enough to get really useful than the imported migrant labor that this thread has been mainly about. We already get a lot of hardware made in “developing countries” for partly-political but mostly-economic reasons, so this is the next natural step. Note the significant difference in wage levels in those countries - we can hire 4 Indians for the cost of 1 American, and the usefulness to the company of each Indian is clearly more than .25A . True, it can be harder to get things communicated via e-mail and teleconferencing than by just going down the hall, and it can be frustrating to be forced to be more of a program coordinator than engineer at times, but the reasons are inarguable. I really think this kind of operation will be the future model, at least for larger firms. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2000, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/37 "2000-12-27T00:47:32Z")
Sam, my admittedly-limited understanding of Canadian immigration law is that it’s even more difficult for a foreigner to get a job there than in the US - it’s effectively impossible unless the Canadian firm can prove they can’t find a Canadian to do the job at any price, and the certification must be periodically renewed. Can you elaborate on that for our enlightenment, and on why you feel qualified to make remarks such as your last one? ---
**Author:** ![JubilationTCornpone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee59a6/32.png) [@JubilationTCornpone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JubilationTCornpone)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2000, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/38 "2000-12-27T03:22:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves \* > \*\*It’s worth considering if the problem itself isn’t already becoming obsolete. There is already a substantial trend in some industries toward hiring foreign technical staff while leaving them in their own countries, avoiding immigration problems altogether. \*\* That’s true, and I think this approach has undeniable advantages. At the same time though, this approach would often require creating facilities in foreign countries. This could _reduce_ the number of jobs available to U.S. citizens. That’s of concern to many U.S. workers who might otherwise complain about high-tech immigration. ---
**Author:** ![Kyuzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/7ea924/32.png) [@Kyuzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyuzo)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2000, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/39 "2000-12-27T04:52:43Z")
FWIW, I would like to believe Matloff is wrong about H-1Bs being used to replace more expensive workers, and that the industry does not discriminate directly or indirectly against older workers, as I, and every other young programmer, will be an old programmer soon enough. I just haven’t been convinced of that. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by ElvisL1ves_ > It’s worth considering if the problem itself isn’t already becoming obsolete. > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by JubilationTCornpone_ > That’s true, and I think this approach has undeniable advantages. So how far do you think the trend will go? Is technical work going to follow the same path as manufacturing and other factory type jobs, meaning massive job cuts in the United States? In that case, should American students stop pursuing technical education, if the jobs it will prepare them for will be outsourced? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2000, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070/40 "2000-12-27T05:10:04Z")
Technical work is inextricably bound up with manufacturing work, so I don’t fully understand your concern. Yes, they’re both much more global than ever before, and technology itself has enabled that. I don’t think you can look at US unemployment figures over recent years and say that “massive job cuts” have really hurt us - in many cases, exporting of mature industries has actually freed intellectual capital to work on growth industries here. Sure, the match isn’t always perfect, and some technical people who haven’t kept themselves up to date fall back temporarily, but that’s not the fault of the Indian guy across town. The key is to keep that trend up, of course. I tend to fall back on history and observe that the country was built by, and has maintained its world economic leadership by, immigrants coming here to work hard and build a better life. With every wave of immigrants, there have been the same complaints about them taking the jobs of honest Americans, but did they really? Aren’t we better off overall? I don’t see what’s fundamentally worse about those immigrants now being Indian programmers instead of Irish bricklayers or Chinese railroad builders, do you? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/immigration-for-techies-in-us/47070.md?page=3)