cb1000rider wrote:And why is that? It's not like someone that has "average" means in Mexico or Guatemala actually has a legitimate means to gaining entry into the USA. Those options are flat unavailable. And honestly, I feel for their positions. If the USA was a wasteland of corruption (well, ok), violence, illegality, and there was limited or no opportunity to work to keep my family alive, would I do something perhaps a little illegal.. Illegal to the tune of a geographic reset if I got caught? That's the reality of it.
Phrased differently than I did and turned around a little that's sort of the point I was making. We're importing uneducated and impoverished people into a country with a generous social welfare system that already has plenty of poor impoverished people who will never escape their poverty because the system has relegated them to perpetual dependency. We don't need any more. If there were a couple million poor people south of the border amid a world of affluence, and inviting them into the US would change that, I'd be all for lifting those impoverished people into affluence. Unfortunately there are billions of such people in the world and there is little to nothing the US can do about it.
This US has already become a wasteland of corruption and illegality and the violence is coming. I understand your point and I understand their motives but it doesn't change what the US can or should do about it. The country can't afford to take these people in on any level. We can't lift our own citizens out of poverty. We can't employ our own youth. The corruption is going to get much worse but it's already so endemic that there is virtually no hope of a correction without the coming inevitable reset. The problem is that things are probably more likely after such a reset to get worse instead of better. Even without the corruption the economic and political path we're on is a path to social and economic disaster. However, the corruption ensures a correction within the system will be next to impossible. That's somewhat ironic, since the illegals are fleeing countries in which a correction within the system is next to impossible.
Our big luxury liner and the big European luxury liner over the horizon are sinking, and just like on the Titanic, there aren't enough lifeboats to go around. Unlike on the Titanic, those running our ship have no honor or integrity. Our crew has no intention of being the last to escape or going down with the ship. Some of the boats were already launched with just a few people aboard and they're paddling away. The rest of us are all drowning in the water. Some have been in the cold sea longer and are more desperate than others. Everyone is scrambling into the few available lifeboats they can reach, but there are more people than the lifeboats can accommodate. So before the night is over, everyone that didn't pull far enough away from the desperate swimmers, or push them away with their oars, is going to drown with them when they sink from the mad scramble for one last seat in the lifeboat.
cb1000rider wrote:VM, you'll love this:
And look, the border is one thing. It's the political punching bag that the people really pulling the strings keep dumb politicians and the public focused on. It's a very hard problem to solve without militarization and massive (think war scale) spending of money we don't have. That's exactly how they want it. The people that are the political money base have caused it to go no where in the last 50 years as keeping that labor is in their financial interest. It runs their businesses and supports their wealth.
Wanna solve it? Lock up people and corporations that hire illegals. Instead, we ignore it. And honestly, we ALL profit from it, especially here in Texas. I know exactly where it's going on in my small community. We tolerate it, but if it was drug sales (just as illegal) - there'd be a massive no-knock raid. This industry benefits us too, it's why our homes are so cheap (relatively) and why our food costs what it does.
My solution - and yea, I'm not just pointing out the problem: Allow it and tax the heck out of it. $5k entry fee, 24 months, pay taxes that cover potential medical issues. No more anchor children. Allow return trips for free within 24 months. This is, realistically, what we have today, only it becomes a source of revenue and eases many of the financial concerns. You won't get blowback from the political donors that have a business interest in keeping it the way it is.
Course, we can't do that, because we didn't spin it that way. We can't revert to reality now and not be political fodder.
I have no particular disagreement with this except for the statement that we all profit from it. I don't profit from it and I'm sure I'm not alone. I'm paying taxes to support it and have absolutely no say in the matter.

Yep, it can't and won't be changed because the very people who need to be held accountable are the ones who profit from it the most and own the system. Well, except it will change eventually, because the reset is inevitable and subject to forces beyond their control. But we probably won't like the results any better.
cb1000rider wrote:I have a lot of experience with the H1B deal. I went through the period of time where everyone was off shoring and we (people in technology) thought that we'd all lose our jobs to engineers would would work for 50% less.
Yea, that didn't work out so well for most companies. Most of the engineering efforts (development) imploded with quality problems. I ran teams of engineers (testers) domestically and in India. India cost less, but the result could never be trusted. That wasn't a one-off experience, it was several experiences. If you can document a process in ridiculous detail, spoon feed every result, then it worked well. By the time you did all that work, it was less expensive to do it in-house.
There are some very talented H1Bs. Because the H1B visa costs the employer money, those employees are disadvantaged. And the H1b employee is tied to the employer - an employment change resets the the application process, so the they don't have the same flexibility as the rest of us (average employee in tech stays about 3 years). I know of on employer that took advantage of this and really brought the hammer down on H1B employees - horrible hours, no raises, and due to a non-tech location, there was nothing that the H1b could do.
There may be jobs that are taken away from STEM graduates, but not that many. Doing new grad hiring, everyone I did hiring for had a significant preference for non-H1bs due to the expense and legal hassle. Some wouldn't even consider them.
Best thing any STEM grad can do is get a job (coop/internship) prior to graduation. And math majors will have a *much* harder time than a computer science or engineering major. And I wish your son continued luck - hopefully he'll get massive career acceleration in the TSA if he can think for himself like his dad.
That more or less duplicates my experience except I never saw it from the hiring side. My previous company did hire H1Bs but I don't think they were being exploited there....or at least my Lebanese friend who was quite candid in describing his experiences, along with those of his brother and friends in the program, never complained. However, recent studies have indicated that this program has depressed salaries for STEM grads.
My son is already escaping the gravity of the TSA. He's about to become a poultry inspector with the USDA. He is also a candidate for a position with CBP as an agricultural specialist. He applied for these and similar positions before entering the TSA and got absolutely nowhere. His qualifications for these positions didn't change, just his entry point.
OTOH, my youngest son did work paid and unpaid internships before entering law school and it hasn't helped him one iota. He's not a STEM graduate, but he speaks, reads, and writes Chinese and Japanese, got a perfect score on the LSAT, and got a full scholarship to the University of Chicago --the country's 4th ranked law school. He is nearing desperation because he's about to graduate and hasn't had a single job offer (he took a brief hiatus and is graduating after the rest of his class). Most of his classmates are unemployed or grossly under employed. One of his friends in the class was a dog walker for awhile and now drives a delivery truck. Another is a haberdasher.
On the positive side it, he was admitted to Harvard Law, and it was a gut wrenching decision for him to turn down admission in favor of the scholarship (Harvard offered zero financial assistance). Now he's very glad he did and doesn't have a crushing $250K student loan debt as many of his fellow law students do.
Edited to add:
BTW, for simplification, I will roughly divide my industry into private companies and the public entity that "regulates" us here in Texas. On the private side most of the STEM employees are US born citizens. On the public side, depending on the particular grouping, non-US born citizens are from 20-40% of STEM employees --mostly Asian (India, Pakistan, China) and some Middle Eastern. I don't know how they came to be in the US. All of them are smart. I've never met a dumb one (but then, when your supply is a pool of candidates from countries that total a good 4 or more times the population the US, you can be pretty selective). I have met dumb US STEM grads but their numbers are insignificant in comparison to the number of dumb non-STEM US college graduates I've encountered. My point is that when you start with an over supply there is no way you can employ upwards of 10% non-US citizens or more and have no impact on wages. Even if you started with an under supply the adding more potential employees to the labor pool is at least going to at least narrow any supply advantage. And once you supply exceeds demand you've shifted to a demand advantage.
And yes, my numbers are purely anecdotal and based on my impressions rather than a rigorous quantification. I haven't bothered to make a precise count because it really doesn't make any difference. I'm only pointing out that there are lots of non-US STEM grads in the country, however they got here. And the ones I'm talking about in my industry no doubt all entered legally. I'm not against legal immigration that benefits the country as a whole --as opposed to primarily the ruling class. I am against providing corporations with incentives that, intended or not, confer benefits for hiring non-US citizens.
"Journalism, n. A job for people who flunked out of STEM courses, enjoy making up stories, and have no detectable integrity or morals."
From the WeaponsMan blog, weaponsman.com