upvote
deleted
reply
> Foreign workers are here for the benefit of the United States

But that's the point, isn't it? Some foreign workers who "worked the US for the benefit of the US" are now unable to come back to the US. Isn't that bad for the US too?

reply
Not until all Americans who can work have jobs
reply
And what do you do about the people who only want to work in jobs that they're not qualified for, and who have unrealistic expectations about pay, benefits, work demands, etc.?

Is every natural-born American entitled to a job that pays what they want, for the hours they want, in the location they want, regardless of their qualifications for the job?

reply
But isn't that how market supposed to work? Company offers to pay x for the job, can't find anyone for x, so it raises salary to x+y.

I would understand logic of bringing people from other countries when there is a shortage of workers but with current market it doesn't seem to be the case.

reply
But America is a capitalist system. The market has determined that not all Americans deserve jobs. Are Americans willing to work a 996 schedule for 2.00/hr to compete with labor overseas?
reply
Nothing in capitalism prevents a country from prioritizing its own citizens.

And it is uncontroversial in most countries that a country should do this.

So this isn't a contradiction. Indeed america is capitalist. And it is also prioritizing its own citizens. There is nothing weird about that.

reply
Most capitalist countries have 100% employment for their citizens and little to no immigration? No. "Every citizen who can work having a job" is not something capitalist countries do. They all take ample advantage of foreign labor, they all have corporations that prioritize their own profits and outsource.
reply
> Most capitalist countries have 100% employment for their citizens and little to no immigration

You must have responded to the wrong post as it has nothing to do with my statement.

That statement is that there is nothing about capitalism that prevents a country from prioritizing its own citizens. That is a perfectly normal and rational thing to do.

Additionally, the exact percentages of unemployement rates also has little to do with capitalism, nor does the uncommonness of fully achieving a lofty but possibly valuable goal also has nothing to do with what capitalism is, nor does it say very much about how valuable that goal is or the value in attempting to aspirationally achieve it.

reply
>You must have responded to the wrong post as it has nothing to do with my statement.

OK. You can't handle context, noted.

>That statement is that there is nothing about capitalism that prevents a country from prioritizing its own citizens.

The free market is what prevents it. The purpose of capitalism is the creation of capital and its transfer to the capitalist class, and the purpose of corporations is to maximize profits to facilitate that process as quickly and efficiently as possible. Neither capitalism as a system nor corporations have an obligation to improve quality of life for their employees beyond their market value, or to "prioritize" the social welfare over profit, or to hire more people than they need.

It's simple supply and demand and there isn't a demand for American labor.

>Additionally, the exact percentages of unemployement rates also has little to do with capitalism

which is weird because you're arguing that capitalist companies need to prioritize "citizen" labor in order to reduce unemployment, or that governments need to force them to.

reply
Do you propose to restrict the international flow of capital too while you're at it? Until every spare US dollar is invested in the US? or you just want to restrict the market for the 99% of people whose biggest asset is their labor.
reply
Dollars and people are not the same thing. I’m not sure how you can even make the claim that they could be or even should be.
reply
It's clear you are not a hiring manager. There aren't thousands of highly qualified engineers looking for work. I can't tell if this a troll post or not.
reply
It's clear you are not considering the long-term effects of labor policy. If we want a stronger domestic workforce, the answer is to incentivize Americans to develop the skills we need and to train them when they do not already have those skills. Mass importing foreign labor is not a substitute for building and investing in the domestic workforce.
reply
Btw, this is analogous to the argument for positive discrimination:

Preferentially treat one group of people (non-white/women/Americans) even if in the short term the revealed preference of businesses is to hire a different group of people (white/men/immigrants), such that, in the long term, the first group of people can develop the necessary skills to compete with the second group.

Short term pain for long term gain.

reply
The arguments can be the same but have entirely different hidden variables that make it fine to use the argument in one context and not the other.

Also, this ignores that the government works for citizens, no matter their race. Promoting racial equality among citizens is a function that the government might undertake. Pursuing policies that favor citizens over non-citizens falls in line with that same reasoning.

reply
No it's really not the same because we have laws against racial discrimination, but it is the entire purpose of the state to represent the interests of its citizens above all others.
reply
Yes, there are thousands of qualified engineers looking for work.
reply
Millions depending on how you cut it.
reply
deleted
reply
It’s a big industry. There are many roles at many different levels of expertise and experience.

Many can’t find locals.

reply
> Many can’t find locals.

*for the price they want to pay.

reply
You can’t get them to apply. They are already very well paid. It’s a finite pool that is not large enough. Bidding up pay won’t change that. Instead you just hire overseas.
reply
Paying more will inherently mean that people cross-train to reap the financial rewards.
reply
I’m very pro immigration, but “Americans are lazy and stupid , thus unfit for hiring” isn’t a winning argument.

Tons of Americans are out of work. I’ve personally seen my wages drop by at least 20$ an hour as well as the work being less stable.

Gasp, you might need to train someone a bit or have employees that will say no if you ask them to work on Christmas.

If I ran the H1B program it would be an unrestricted work permit with an automatic pathway to a GC after 5 years. Don’t get *convicted* of a felony and here you go.

reply
They would be looking for work with you if you were offering them better pay and conditions than where they're currently working.
reply
Money does not fix the supply problem the parent comment pointed out (at least for fields that need multi year training).

Let’s say that tomorrow we need 1M nuclear physicists. How can money help? You still need to wait for the talent pipeline to divert.

reply
Fortunately such ridiculous hypotheticals have no correspondence to reality. Most every job can be easily trained or cross trained. Mathematicians make good physicists. Nor is there some foreign pipeline of a million physicists. Such ridiculous argument exist only to perpetuate the lie of a skills shortage and deny the wage shortage.
reply
They may make good physicists, but not great physicists. Similar to saying I know how to drive a car, now let me win the inde 500. Things take to for specialization, even with the advent of guessing and checking machines (llms).
reply
A shocking number of innovations in x field are because y person brought an idea that maps from z field. Cross functional teams are important and mathematicians can and absolutely do make top level contributions to physics.

One of the math problems recently publicized as having being solved by was actually just discovering that a German mathematician had published a solution in the 1950s.

reply
With training (remember that?) and practice, one could vastly improve. It’s called a growth mindset.
reply
Why are they needed in the USA, but not needed in their home country?
reply
deleted
reply
Hiring is such a shit show, there's no reason to assume the people doing the hiring know what they're doing. Like HR has to insert them selves into the process
reply
deleted
reply