[015a]

The reality that I observe with H1Bs among a couple of my friends who are here on one is: They are paid less, they dislike their jobs, and they feel a tremendous inability to find a new one.

H1Bs are figuratively a policy disconcertingly similar to slave labor.

Much of this election cycle has been about the schism between the ground truth people observe, and what we're being told by the elites; the economy is good, but many people are struggling, stuff like that. H1Bs are that for me. Everyone says we need them, that our industry would be screwed without them; but what I see is a program which exists only to prop up unsustainable companies on the backs of cheap indentured labor; it does not serve the interests of the American people. The vast majority go to companies like Accenture; trash consulting companies.

Immigration is America's superpower. Temporary migrant workers are not immigration. The goal of every foreign worker entering America should be citizenship, every migrant worker program should pose citizenship as the outcome, and if it would be politically/economically unsustainable to do that the program should not exist.

[franktankbank]

> Immigration is America's superpower.

I think America's natural resources are its superpower personally. Immigration has historically been important in setting up systems for extracting these resources however I think whether its good at a given time needs to be justified every time.

[015a]

As global birthrates decline, as they are, nations which can consistently and willingly integrate immigrants have a huge cultural superpower. America does this better than any nation; we're the only nation on the planet that someone can come to and "become" our nationality. As an American; I can (with difficulty) move to Japan, but I cannot become Japanese; I can't become Australian; I can't become British, German, Chinese, or Indian; but people from those countries may come to America and become, in every sense of the word, American. That's a superpower. It might change over time, but its still true today.

When you combine that superpower with our insane natural resources; our insane oceanic coverage on the west and east borders; and our cultural and governmental bias toward personal freedom; there's simply no alternate reality or predictable-term future where America isn't a global leader.

[RajT88]

Some parts of the country you can "become American". My wife is a naturalized citizen from a former colony nation, and some places we travel people make it clear that they feel she is not a "real American" despite almost no accent and having lived here twice as long as where she was born.

[rayiner]

Ironically, DC makes me feel that way the most, where I routinely have to suffer the indignity explaining to people in professional contexts about my “diverse background” while they “ohh” and “ahh.”

[RajT88]

I've heard that complaint from second gen immigrants. First gen don't seem to mind quite as much. (Just my observation - my wife also holds this view)

Performative interest in diversity is condescending and othering. Well, performative interest period can be condescending and othering, regardless of the topic.

[rayiner]

I’m first gen so I actually think of myself as less American than say my wife, whose ancestors came over before the revolutionary war. So I’m not offended that someone might view me that way. I just don’t see the point of making me discuss that in a professional setting. It’s like “dance for us, foreigner!”

[gcapell]

Australian here: I think anyone can become Australian.

[snapplebobapple]

You're forgetting Canada eh? Noo doobt aboot it, you can become a Canadian just by moving too eh. Only hosers forget Canada eh!

[jvanderbot]

There's one other way. While "demographic collapse" is an overwrought problem, relative demographic advantage (a country having more favorable demographics for growth) is an area we can optimize for, and immigration (as well as child-positive culture) are a great way to ensure economic growth when dialed in properly.

[salawat]

Child positive growth only serves to further the Ponzi-esque post New Deal-esque Social Security apparatus. It is no more stable/sustainable than reliance on H-1B's. Until we break the Ponzi structure, all we're doing is gaslighting the next generation.

[tzs]

It should be possible to make a sustainable SS-like system. I recently did an interesting calculation using the SS taxes on my pay over my career so far.

If the SS taxes from my pay had each month been been put in an account that invested in 1-year T-bills at whatever the current rate was at the start of that month, and when T-bills matured they were rolled over into new T-bills, the amount in that account now would be enough to cover what my monthly benefit would be if I retired now for the rest of the expected lifespan of a US person of my age and sex.

I also did a similar calculation with the Medicare taxes from my pay. That account would have enough that if put toward monthly premiums on a decent insurance plan from the ACA marketplace in my state the amount I'd have to contribute monthly is close to the amount of the current Medicare premium.

[jvanderbot]

Perhaps. Or it can be reformed. Most my retirement savings comes from averaged market growth. Kids are the future - having kids shouldn't be a burden. Most people will have only a few kids if given the chance, not 10.

[franktankbank]

Shouldn't retirements be dividends based? Why are we assuming growth all the time? Seems like a potent meme.

[jvanderbot]

Depends on your age, I guess. It's not like I manage my portfolio myself. I defer to e.g., Vanguard and they do what they do and I just watch the balance periodically. Once I get near retirement, I'll start reinvesting accordingly.