|
|
|
|
|
|
by tn13
3426 days ago
|
|
|
> It's simple economics. H1B's increase the supply of developers in the US, relative to the demand. And that drives the price of developers (i.e. wages) down. I don't think any intelligent person can fail to understand that. The simple economics you are quoting will argue against protectionism. Even hypothetically assuming it will increase wages it will in turn make it costly to innovate and increase the cost of services for average American consumer. If Citibank charges $25 monthly fee they might have to charge $30 to make the same money. That generally hurts American consumer just the way American protectionism towards Steel and Sugar industry hurts American consumers while benefiting special interest groups. For those of us who have taken Econ 101 can tell you that this is even worse for resources such as human mind. The marginal impact on salaries with every additional H1B US taken in next to 0 simply because Job at higher end are not zero sum game. Each extra person helps grow the pie significantly this increasing the salaries even further. For low value jobs such as a gardener, a cheaper labor will replace the expensive one because having two gardeners does not increase the productivity of the employer by 2X. But for high-end jobs such as say a Doctor, having many doctors would mean more drugs, faster solution to diabetes and cancer. |
|
|
You're quite right, of course, and until about a week ago, I would have opposed this change to the law on that basis. But I've had a bellyful of being lectured and name-called by self-righteous billionaires. So now whatever hurts them and helps me, I'm all for.
And although protectionism does hurt a country overall, it helps individuals and companies that are protected from competition. And for this change to the H1B law, I fall into that group. So bring on the protectionism, I say.