I'm not favoring a race to the bottom but I understand the allure of getting better talent for cheaper. And the allure of getting pay more than you currently are getting.

Sure cost of living in SV is higher, but saving 5% of 100k is a lot more $$$ than 15% of 24k. And you're exposes to better opportunities.

That's the thing though, the h1b aren't getting 5% of 100k, they're getting 5% of 60k and bringing down the demand for locals. Unless these people are worth the money, then businesses should be expected to pay the money. So in short if they plan to raise number of h1b visas, the salary minimum should be significantly and from my understanding it already has.

What is wrong with a race to the bottom? Less salary means more profit for businesses and/or cheaper products

I sell my labor in exchange for money, and so it's in my interest for wages to be as high as possible, if not higher.

Sure, it's in your interest for your wages to be as high as possible, but does this maximize overall welfare?

By banning competition, the H-1B person's wage and the employer's profits go down and the product price increases.

How much depends on the relative elasticities.

Isn't this richer people banning much poorer people (immigrants) from competing with them?

> does this maximize overall welfare

I'm not a utilitarian.