[TorontoTheGood]

That's not what I am asking. I want to know why US-born people in tech is/was so pro open border when it clearly does not benefit US labor. You don't get a lot of push-back from within tech against these hiring practices.

[xhkkffbf]

I think the answer is that it depends upon who is talking and how the question is asked. Many recognize that it helps the US to import great talent. But people also recognize the downward pressure on wages and the sometimes explicit racism that appears. It's not usual to hear stories of managers who only want to hire people with the same skin color.

So if you ask the question in general, you'll get some basic support. But if you ask, perhaps, about H1B abuse you'll find that people will often confirm that it occurs.

[franktankbank]

I used to have more open attitudes, probably mostly stemming from the idea that America should take in the best and the brightest and that was a big driver of Americas rise to power. I sort of see it more like a Trojan horse as used in the last 30 - 40 years.

[uberman]

30 and 40 years ago H-1b visa essentially represented a source of indentured servile class of employee. People with no rights and enough fear to keep their mouths shut. If your trojan horse reference relates to these people getting permanent status and job mobility and leadership positions then sure. I would agree. On the other hand there is no coordinated malice here. Just individuals who graduated from the exploited immigrant to the tech leader who now manages a team of their countrymen hoping for thier own trojan horse opportunity.

[franktankbank]

I'm not really sure how to clarify what I mean by Trojan horse. I think people respond to incentives so I don't really care how people take advantage of that. I do think that there is some shortsightedness on the part of the people that created the incentives. If not shortsightedness perhaps a cultural cynicism on one or the other side of the exchange.